Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society

Material Information

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
Palestine Oriental Society
Place of Publication:
Palestine Oriental Society


Subjects / Keywords:
Palestine Oriental Society ( lcsh )
Middle East -- Palestine ( LCSH )
Middle East -- Palestine -- History ( LCSH )
Palestine -- History
serial ( sobekcm )
Spatial Coverage:
Asia -- Palestine -- Jerusalem
Asia -- Israel -- Jerusalem
Asia -- Palestinian Authority -- Jerusalem
31.783333 x 35.216667


General Note:
Predominantly published in English, with selected texts and articles in Arabic and Hebrew.
General Note:
This title is in the public domain under the laws of British Mandate Palestine as well as the contemporary law of Israel.

Record Information

Source Institution:
SOAS University of London
Holding Location:
SOAS, University of London
Rights Management:
This item is licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial License. This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon this work non-commercially, as long as they credit the author and license their new creations under the identical terms.
Resource Identifier:
381468 ( ALEPH )
913.3945 P.17 ( DDC )
Per 5 ( SOAS Classmark )


This item has the following downloads:

Full Text

Accession No.
I ١،~---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meadville Theological School
Class ßook No. F


H. E. Field Marshal the Viscount Allenby G-C.B., G.C.M.G.
H. E. the Right Honourable Sir Herbert Samuel G.B.E.
Board of Directors:
Dr. WÙ  F. Albright President
The Right Rev. the Archbishop
Timotheus P. Themelis Vice-President
Mr. Eliezer Ben Yehudah Vice-President
The Rev. Herbert Danby Secretary
Dr. Nahum Slousch Treasurer
Prof. J. G-arstang Director
Le Rev. Pere Gtaudens Orfali Director
Mr. Ronald Storrs Director
Editor of the Journal:
The Rev. Herbert Danby
Editorial Advisory Board:
Dr. W. F. Albright
Le Rev. Pere Dhorme
Mr. W. J. Phythian-Adams
Mr. David Yellin



Abel, F.-M., 0. P. Le Tombeau d’Isa’ie.................................25
— Le culte de Jonas en Palestine................................175
Albright, W. F. The Earliest Forms of Hebrew Verse.....................69
— Palestine in the Earliest Historical Period...................110
Canaan, T. Byzantine Caravan Routes in the Negeb......................139
Dhorme, P., 0. P. Un mot aryen dans le Livre de Job....................66
El-Barghuthi, Omar. Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine . . 34
Haddad, E. N. The Guest-House in Palestine............................279
Mackay, E. J. A. Note on a Scene in Tomb 85 at Thebes.................171
McCown, C. C. The Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 1
Orf ali, Gaudence, 0. F. M. La derniere periode de l’histoire de Capharnaiim 87
Phythian-Adams, W. J. Aiguptos: A Derivation and some Suggestions . . 94
Stephan, St. H. The Division of the Year in Palestine.................159
— Modern Palestinian Parallels to the Song of Songs.............199
Sukenik, L. The Ancient City of Philoteria (Beth Yerah) ...... 101
Tolkowsky, S. Aphek. A Study in Biblical Topography...................145
Notes and Communications...................................... 184 284
Book Reviews.......................................................190
Report of the Treasurer of the Palestine Oriental Society...................291
Members of the Palestine Oriental Society...................................292

THE student of history frequently has to deal with traditions
whose origin and development are most puzzling. His method
of treating them must be determined by knowledge of other traditions
the course of whose growth is more easily followed. FeÙ¦v have a
richer and more varied documentation than that which glorifies the
wisdom of Solomon. It may well serve as an example of the manner
in which the human mind works in certain fields.
With the facts behind the tradition I am not concerned. The
reputation which the great king actually deserves may be left to
students of the Old Testament. The literary starting-point for the
legends that have developed touching the king’s wisdom is to be
found in 1 Kings 3, in the story of Solomon’s dream.1 In this
passage, as Benzinger well says, the writer has in mind the judicial
wisdom of the ruler. On the contrary in ch. 5 9—14 (4 29—34) he not
only thinks of ،،religious ٦visdom in practical life” but, in comparing
Solomon’s wisdom with that of ،،the children of the East,” and the
،،wisdom of the Egyptians/’ he intends to imply that Solomon was
master of the magical and astrological knowledge in which the
ancients were supposed to excel.2 It is difficult to date precisely
1 1 Kings 3 4-i،; paralleled without important changes in 2 Chr. 1 7-13, except
that Solomon’s superiority is promised only over other kings. The tradition has
not yet begun to grow.
2 As the book of Exodus, for example, testifies. See Benzinger’s Konige
(1899) 23 f., on 1 Kings 5 9-٦،.

2 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
this earliest allusion to the magical knowledge of Solomon. But the
verses in question probably belong to the final redaction of the Book
of Kings.Ø› In any case, since the passage is in the Septuagint, it
must have come into the Hebrew Bible two centuries or more before
the beginning of our era. Thus in leading circles ot' Palestinian
Judaism Solomon had thus early come to be accepted as a
Whether the interpolatoi’ of the passage thought of him also as
the author of magical books is less certain. Without doubt many
readers would understand (¿Sat' to mean, not psalms, but carmina,
incantations, and would take discourses “of trees” (yirep TCOV £ااسدو٦) to
include their medical, or what then amounted to the same thing,
their magical uses.2 These verses are an excellent example of “how
much wood is kindled by how small a fire,” for they are the excuse
for the ascription to Solomon of a whole library of books on almost
every conceivable subject.
How shall we explain the development of the relatively simple
story of the dream of Solomon into the much more complicated and
detailed claims of this passage? It seems to me most natural to
suppose that already in his lifetime Solomon had enjoyed a reputation
for proverbial wisdom and that by the time these verses-were written
collections of proverbs and verses dealing with some of the subjects
enumerated were already in circulation. This must remain, however,
only an assumption, for no decisive proof is at hand.3
Indeed Wisdom 7 17—22, the next refei’ence to Solomon’s magical
knowledge, makes no allusion to writings. But the context does not
call for it and the passage plainly involves a claim for the author
of knowledge of astrology, of the nature of beasts and spirits, as
well as of men, of the evepycia طءع\لم0اً٠ن, the 8ta piL, and of “all things that are either secret or manifest.” Thus a
1 So Benzinger, loc. cit, Kautzsch, Eeil. Schr. des AT, seems to imply that the
passage belongs to the earlier sources of Kings. Stade and Schwally in Haupt’s
polychi'ome Hebrew Bible color it as a ،،non-Deuteronomic addition of unknown
01’igin.” steuernagel. Ein. AT 356 and ZATW 1910, 70, favors a very late date.
2 So Christian writersØ› see below p. 10.
3 For an analysis of 1 Kings 5 9-14 (4 29-34) see Salzberger, Georg, Die Salomo-
sage in der sewitisclen Literatur*. ein Beitrag zur nergleichenden Sagenlnnde.
I. Teil. Hiss. Heidelberg. Berlin 1907, pp. 9—12, 94-97, 99.

McCOWN: ØŸThe Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 3
thoroughly educated and highly cultured Jew of the Dispersion inter-
prets the language of the Septuagint. To him such wisdom as the
Book of Kings claimed for Solomon necessarily implied a knowledge
of all the ،،science” of his day, and that included astrology, magic,
medicine, and sorcery.1
An allusion to Solomon’s authority over the demons is found in
a work of a very different sort, the Citharismus regis David contra
daemonum Saulis, which Dr. James, the editor, assigns to the first
century of our era. David is represented as singing to the demon
which has possessed Saul: ،،Later times will demonstrate from what
race I was born, for hereafter there will be born from me one who
٦vill control you.”2 Dr. James says: ،،In this last sentence it seems
at first sight as though we had a prophecy of Messiah and possibly
a Christian touch. But a little consideration will show, I think, that
the ،vanquisher of demons’ who is to spring from David is not Messiah,
but Solomon the king of the Genies, the wizard” of Josephus and
the Testament of Solomon.3
Josephus contributes the cornerstone of the Jewish foundation
upon which the Christian tradition regarding Solomon rests. Without
his explicit statements one might even be inclined to doubt the
foregoing interpretation of earlier writers. After repeating with
some embellishments the scriptural statements regarding Solomon’s
wisdom and writings he adds: ،،God also gave him to know the art
that is used against the demons for help and healing to men. He
composed incantations by which diseases are rebuked and left kinds
of exorcisms by which demons are bound and driven away never to
return. And this treatment is most successful among us up to the
present time.” And Josephus proceeds to relate how a certain
fellow-countryman of his, Eleazar, in the presence of Vespasian and
his court, expelled a demon from a man by ،،holding under the
nostrils of the demoniac his ring, which had under the seal one
of the roots indicated by Solomon,” and by ،،mentioning Solomon
and repeating the incantations which he composed.” ،،By this
1 I have followed the translation of Siegfried in Kautzsch, Apokr. u. Pseudep.
des AT I 490, and Holmes in Charles, Apocr. and Pseudep. of the OT I 546.
2 Agent autem tempora noua unde natus sum; de quo nascitur post tempus
de laterihus meis qui uos domavit.
3 Texts and Studies II, 3 (1893); Apocrypha Anecdota p. 183 and 184.

4 Journal of the Palestine 01’iental Society
event,” he says, “the power and wisdom of Solomon are clearly
Josephus thus gives evidence of a living, popular tradition as to
Solomon magus. He also tells US that books were in circulation
giving his recipes. His very slight alteration of the biblical account
of 'the writings of Solomon is inost instructive. It bespeaks a know-
ledge of what was actually in circulation. Solomon, he says, “also
composed books of odes and songs, five besides the thousand and
three thousand books of parables and comparisons, for he spoke a
proverb upon every kind of tree, from the hyssop to the cedar, and
in the same manner also concerning beasts and all the terrestrial
animals and the aquatic and the aerial, for he was not ignorant of
the nature of any of them neither did he pass over any without -
consideration, but philosophized on all and showed his knowledge of
their peculiar characteristics to be of the highest.” 2
It is possible that in speaking of ؛؛parables and comparisons”
(qrapafSoXiav Kat €،kovm) Josephus is merely rhetorically tautological
and means nothing more than proverbs. But the word €،K(OV, which
means “parable, comparison,” as well as “image,” was later used as
the title of works on the medicinal, or magical,' virtues of plants,
such as the KO ØŸ KaÙ¢a (TTOLxeZov of Pamphilus. It seems very likely
then that Albrecht Dieterich was right in supposing that Josephus
knew of works undei’ such a title ascribed to Solomon.3
6ة ع*ضه11 ا avrدلم هadeiv 0 0 ه Kai T7]P Kara rCov baipbpcap els ۵ Oepairelap TOLS dpGpfbiTOLS. eitLpbas re (TVPTaZapepos als irapvyopeLTaL Ta rpbirovs
¿ZopKibcreajp KaTtXvrrep, OLS ¿pbotipepa (Naber: ol .¿pbovpepoL Niese) rd baipbpca- ٢سلم’
¿irapeXOelp eKbidjKOvai. Kai avTT) p¿XP1 VVP Trap’ vplv V Gepairela TrXeccTTOP laxuer uTTbpiqaa
yap Tipa ’EXeafapop 7س opo(¡)vXwp, Ovecnraacapov irapopTos Kai 7-۵7> vl&p C107O Kai xCXcdpxoJP
Kai dXXov (TTpanwTLKOv irXTjOovs, TOVS 07TO tGjp baipoplwp Xapftapopbous diroXvoPTa T0VT03P.
6 o¿ TT)s GepaTrelas Tpbiros ٣O،O0٣O5 r]P, irpoaipepojp Tais picrl TOU baipopi&ptpov TOP baKT&Xiop,
غxovra VITO TY¡ (?(ppayibi plfap مةتج07٢ ^۵ £تج loXopdjp, 7’ ¿&IXKCV ¿(Ttppovptpip bid TWP
pvKrqpwp TO baipbPLOP, Kai 7recrbpTOS euGbs TdpGpdrrrov pyikIt CIS aVTOP ¿irapTfeeip cbpKov, 'XoXop&pbs
T€ peppy]ptpos Kai Tds eircpbas ds ZoXopwpos KaGuTTaTo bupeats Kai (T0(pla. Ant. viii 2, 5 (45-49).
2 2 e-d 0.7-0 bk Kai [3i{3\la 7repl (pbu)P Kai لم¿eX۵^ 7r^7-e 7rpbs TOLS x،X٤0iS, Ka٤ - ^a^a^oX۵^
Kai elKOPWP [3l[3Xovs 7-^،o-x،X٤a5 - KaG’ cKacTTOP 7مئ echos Mpbpov irapafioVqp elirep, Ci(])’ vacrdbirov
COJS Ktbpov, t6p 500707-7 تج, Kai irepl' KTTJPWP Kai TUP 7' ¿ircyelwp dirapTWP fyojp Kai 7"۵7,
PYIKTWP Kai Tuip aepicop ’ ovbepLap yap T0iL)Tb>p (pvacp Yiyphvcrep 00تجه ^a۶^X0e^ ape^TaaTOPf XX’
¿p Traer cus ¿0،Xo o-007?o-e Kai 7-^7, ¿7Ti(rrT)p7]P TWP تجp corrals IbiojpaTOjp &Kpap 7تجrelel&TO. Ant.
viii 2, 5 (44).
3 Abraxas 142 f., Leid. Pap. 780 ff.

McCOWN: The Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 5
An instructive difference develops in the course of time between
the Jewish and Arabic tradition on the one hand and that of
Christendom on the other. In all alike Solomon is celebrated as a
magician. Targum Sheni Esther, for example, says that ،،Solomon
ruled over the wild beasts, over the birds of the heaven, and over
the creeping beasts of the earth, as well as over the devils, the
spirits of the night; and he understood the language of all these
according as it is written, ،and he talked with the trees.’”1 This
substitution of talking with the trees for the Ù¥/ which is found in
1 Kings 5 13 (4 33) and of ruled over for the spake of in the following
verse is an interesting example of the development of legend. Both the
Quran and the Arabian Nights have made the legends of Solomon’s
rulership over the jinn, his use of them in building the temple, and
his sealing the rebellious in bottles common property in both the
East and the West.2 In Abt Vogler Browning speaks of the time
،،when Solomon ٦villed
Armies of angels that soar, legions of demons that lurk,
Man, brute, reptile, fly, — alien of end and of aim,
Adverse, each from the other heaven-high, hell-deep removed,—
Should rush into sight at once as he named the ineffable Name,
And pile him a palace straight, to pleasure the princess he loved.”
Equally a commonplace of folklore and literature is the might of
the ring of Solomon and its magic seal. Josephus’ account of
Eleazar’s performance before Vespasian implies a Solomonic ring as
part of the known tradition, but it is a root under the seal and not
the seal which is powerful.3 In the great Paris magic papyrus is an
often quoted passage, which the heathen magician no doubt copied
from Jewish sources. One of the incantations runs, ،،I adjure thee
by the seal which Solomon laid upon the tongue of Jeremiah and
he spoke.” 4 The meaning of the lines is as yet an unsolved riddle.
I am inclined to the opinion that behind it lies a legend of Solomon’s
1 Salzberger, Salomosage 93 f., from f. 440, ed. David p. 8.
2 Quran, Sura 38:35fiÙ ., SBE IX (II) 179 (cf. Sale, ad loc.), 27:7, SBE IX
(II) 101. Nights 566 f., ed. Lane-Poole III 110f., ed. Burton VI 84 f.
3 See note above, p. 3 (note Ù¥).
4 Bibliotheque Nationale, Suppl. grec. no. 574, 11, 3039f.: opidfa (rtypayiSos rjs ¡■Octo 'ZoXopXov ¿ttI rrjv y\Gxnia.v rou ’Iepypiiou Kai ¿Xd\rj

6 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
dealing with some demon who refused to speak until the ring was
laid, upon his tongue, and whose name has been corrupted in the
papyrus.؛ In any case we have here a very eai’ly reference to the
magic ring. The papyrus was written in the third 01 fourtli century
of our era. Albrecht Dieterich is surely right in saying that -the
passage is not earlier than the time of EupolemosÙ 2 It is of course
mucli earlier than the time of its use by the heathen magician who
copied tlie papyrus, doubtless from a Jewish source in this section..
Scores of amulets and incantations from all ages witness to a living
faith in Solomon as a great magician who had power over demons
and disease. The seal of Solomon and the jinn of Solomon are
mentioned in Aramaic incantation texts.s Museums have many
amulets, and mediaeval manuscripts reproduce many cl'iarms in
Syriac, Arabic, and .Hebrew, as well as in Greek, Latin, and modern
European languages, which demonstrate his popularity.* Dr. Canaan
has shown that his name is still one to conjure with among the
peoples of Palestine.Ù†
In doing honor to Solomon tlie magician, the West and the East,
Christian, Moslem, and Jew agree. It is in the use of Solomonic
books of magic that they part company. Jews and Moslems know
little or nothing of the kind. According to the Talmud Hezekiah
“suppressed the book of recipes,” 6 and this according to Maimonides
and Rashi means a book which Solomon wrote. Maimonides held
that it was a book of magic,ØŸ Rashi that, though it. was only a book
د Lht m Osten ١ذأد .لآ ٦١<؟ل.لآ Light from the Act
East p. 257, n. 10) thinks the passage may allude to some legend connected with
the Septuagint of Jer. 1 6-10. As a possible allusion to such a legend as I ha١٢e
in mind I may quote an equally enigmatic line from an amulet given in a manU’
script of the Bologna University, No. 3632, f. 360 a and a Vienna manuscript,
BhilGraec. No. 108, f.361a, as’ follows: Lbov ’ZoXo/jmv vids Hid dpaKovros ?x٠a
رءملج KtyaXov.
2 Abraxas p. 142ff., Leid. Pap. 780h'.
3 Montgomery. Aramaic Incantation Texts from Nippur, 80, 170, 173, 232, 248.
4 See, for example, Sachau, Katalog d. Syr. USS. Berlin, I 367, No. 10 n,
f. 54b; Sorlin Dorigny, “Salomo als Reiter,” in Bev. des Etudes Grecs IV (1891)
217—296; Schlumberger, ibid. V (1892) 84; Heim, “Incant. magica,” Jahrb. fur
class. Philol. Sup. XIX (1893) pp. 463-576, Nos. 56 = 169, 61, 62, 236, 237.
5 Aberglaube und Volksmedizin ،im Lande der Bibel, للآل١لآل١ ,للالآ
6 n٥٦٦٥D ددا, Berakoth ¡.Pesachim 56a (Goldschmidt 135, 11520; cf. Jer. 30 13.
See A. Wiinsch, ZDMG IXVI (1912) 414.
7 Surenhusius, Mishna II 149, de Paschali iv 9.

McCOWN: The Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 7
of medical recipes, it was evil because it led men not to pray to
God.1 It would appear that this sort of tradition was avoided in
official Judaism, for elsewhere rabbinic literature does not, to the
best of my knowledge, refer to such works. Indeed Moses becomes
the representative wise man in Jewish literature and folklore, as
Solomon does for Christians, and magical books of various kinds are
written in’ his name.2 Dr. Gaster has edited the Sword of Moses, an
Aramaic collection of incantations coming from early in the Christian
era.3 Professor Albrecht Dieterich and before him Leemans edited
a Leiden Papyrus in Greek of magical contents called the ،،Eighth
Book of Moses.”4 If this papyrus book, written in the third or fourth
century, really goes back to the second, as Dieterich maintained,
we have here early evidence for the acceptance of Moses as a
magician in Jewish circles, for Christian influence upon the heathen
compiler of the work could not be expected at that date.
Ù¡Vhen we reach the Middle Ages, Solomon reappears in Jewish
literature as the â– ØŒwise man and magician. Writers of the twelfth
and following centuries regard him as the source of all wisdom,
including medicine, magic, and astrology.5 Since this tradition seems
to have disappeared from Judaism for a time, it is natural to assume
that it reappears under the influence of Moslem and Christian folklore
and literature. Shemtob ben Isaac of Tortosa (1260) gives a ،،des-
cription of the wisdom of Solomon, especially in natural science,،، in
his paraphrase of Zahravi’s Tasrif (xi cent.), called n٦٥t٥۶H ٦٥٥. In
Zahravi he found mention of a ،،covenant،، (٢١١٦٥) of Solomon which
،،was engraved on a tablet of white marble upon the wall of his
palace, as ٦vell as various recipes (H١٦p١٥١ n١Nn٥١۵) which were
explained by the moderns (D١۵١٦nK،٦); Shemtob had learned more
about the matter from Christians ،here in Marseilles’ than he found
ا Grünbaum, ZBMGr XXXI 00.
Ù  2 Kohler in JE IV 518. So already Eupolemos; cf. Eusebius Praep. Ev. ix 26.
3 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 1896, also separate.
4 ١لآلآة١٦لههغأ ٦١٦٠١ .لآةلآ لآث٢ةةغأ Papyri Graeci Musei Antia. Publici Lugd. Bat.
Lugd. Bat. 1885, vol. II, pp. 77—198; A. Dieterich, Abraxas. Leipzig 1891,
pp. 154—166, 169—205. Tlie title as given in the papyrus is BIßXos lepa ¿iriKaXovptyr]
تغرلحهدنم öySÖT) 'MiCtjvtreQJS 1repl TOU Ovb/JLCLTOS TOU aylou.
5 Citations in Steinschneider, Hebräische Übersetzungen des Mittelalters p. 936,
Nos. 225, 226, p. 849f.

8 Journal of the Palestine (Mental Society
in Zahravi.1 The ،،covenant” and the ،،engravings” are both well
known to Christian writers, as we shall see later.
In the seventeenth century that strange collection of astrology,
demonology, and magic called the ،،Key of Solomon” appears in
HebreÙ¡v. Dr. H. Gollancz, who has edited it,2 thinks it may Ù¦vell
have been written originally in Hebrew and brought from the East
by the followers of the Pseudo-Messiah Sabbatai Zevi, though the
manuscript, which is in an Italian hand, has obvious later additions.3
Jewish cabbalistic works early began to appear in European
languages, and many, like Sepher Raziel and the Grimorium Verum
were ascribed to Solomon by their translators or compilers, but I
do not know that this Ù¦vas done by Jewish cabbalists.
Among Moslem writers the official tradition amounts to a complete
denial to Solomon of any kind of magical Ù¦vriting. AsÙ a passage in
the Quran and the comments upon it demonstrate, magical Ù¡vritings
ascribed to Solomon were in circulation. Sura 2 95 if. reads, Ù¡ØŒAnd
when there came unto them a prophet from God confirming that
scripture which was with them, some of these to whom the scriptures
were given cast the book of God behind their backs as if they knew
it not: and they follow the device which the devils devised against
the kingdom of Solomon; and Solomon was not an unbeliever, but
the devils believed not, they taught men sorcery.” Yahya and
Jallalo’ddin record a tradition that the devils wrote books of sorcery
and hid them under Solomon’s throne. After his death they dis-
covered them and spread them abroad among the people as his in
an attempt to blacken his character, pretending that it was thus he
had obtained his power and wisdom.4 This official condemnation of
Solomonic magical writings proves their existence among the Arabs
of Mohammed’s time and also probably in the time of the commen-
tators who record the tradition, and makes their use among Jews
in the East more than likely.
1 Ibid., pp. 740—743. Zahravi is variously called A؟ararius, Azara٦٢i, etc.
2 Clavicula Salomonis. London 1903.
3 Ibid., p. 16 ff. But see pp. 19 and 34. It seems to me as likely that the
Ù¦vork is a translation from the Latin or Greek of some Christian; this better
explains the protestation of the author regarding the cross.
4 So Sale, ad. loc. Palmer’s note, SBE VI (Quran II) 14, does not so well
explain the passage, as it is concerned solely with books. Fabricius, Cod. Pseud.
VÙ  T. Hamburg. 1713, I 1050, has a slightly different version of the tradition.

McCOWN : The Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 9
I have given so much attention to the Jewish and Arab traditions
regarding Solomon in order to thro٦١٢ light on the Christian trans-
mission of the body of legends, partly by way of comparison, partly
by way of contrast. In Christendom there is no hesitation in ascribing
books of magic to Solomon and the literary and the living tradition,
if I may so distinguish them, that which depends upon quotation
from previous writers and that Ù¦vhich reflects the actual use of
Solomonic magic, are equally full.
One element of the Christian literary tradition depends upon
Josephus, and his statements as to the use of incantations composed
by Solomon. It is a question whether Origen’s reference is based
upon personal knowledge or is adapted from Josephus. He says:
،،It is customary to adjure demons witli adjurations written by
Solomon. But they themselves who use these adjurations sometimes
use books not properly constituted; indeed they even adjure demons
with some books taken from Hebrew.”1 Apparently the first to
quote Josephus expressly is Georgios Monachos. He sharply
abbreviates his source, merely saying, “And indeed Josephus mentions
many of these works as having been reduced to writing, how that
Solomon composed incantations against demons and exorcisms,” and
giving a brief account of Eleazar's cure of the demoniac.2 Kedrenos
in one place quotes Josephus quite in full, in another the summary
of Georgios Monachos.3 Zonaras makes his own abbreviation of
Josephus, or else of Kedrenos, giving a rather better summary than
Georgios Monachos.4 Glykas quotes Josephus as summarized by
Georgios Monachos and then adds ٦١٢isdom 7 20, which speaks of
1 A Salomone scriptis adjurationibus soient daemones adjurari. Sed ipsi qui
utuntur adjurationibus illis, aliquoties nec idoneis constitutis libris utuntu: qui-
busdam autem et de Hebraeo acceptis adjurant daemonia. In Mattheum comm,
ser. (tact. 33) 110, Migne, Pair. Graec. 13, 1757, to Mt. 26 63.
2 Georgios Monachos, or Hamartolos, Chron. ii, 42, 4, Migne, Patr. Graec.
11^-249, c. 850.
ر Mîg’ne, op. cit. 121, 156 B and 196D, c. 1100.
A Annal, ii 8, Migne, op. cit. 134, 168, c. 1150.

10 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
Solomon’s knowledge of plants and animals.؛ All these chronographei
add other materials also, as we shall see.
Another element in the Christian tradition takes its rise directly
from the Old Testament account of Solomon’s superior wisdom. In
the tenth of his Quaestiones on 1. Kings Theodoret explains that
Solomon’s wisdom was greater than that of all the ancients and of
the Egyptians, because it was given him of God.2 In Question 18
he goes on to claim that the knowledge of medicine was entirely
derived from Solomon. As the passage is decisive as to the meaning
which was ordinarily put upon the Old Testament account of Solomon’s
wisdom, and as it also is quite illuminating as to the character of
ancient medicine, I will quote parts of it. Theodoret asks, “What
is to be understood by the expression, ‘He spake concerning the
trees...’?” and. answers, "It means that he described the natures
and powers both of plants and trees and indeed of the irrational
animals alsoØ› whence I think also the medical books that have been
written have their source for the most part .... telling for what
disease this part of this animal is an antidote, as the gall of the
hyena, the fat of the lion, tlie blood of the bull, or the flesh of
lizards. For the wise among the physicians have written concerning
these things, taking the starting point of their first works from the
writings of Solomon.” 3
Prokopios of Gaza, without acknowledging his debt, quotes the
answer to Question 10 of Theodoret word for word and that to
Question 18 as far as “for the most part” (7٢a/x7roAAa).4 Anastasios
Sinaites repeats Question 18 and its answer almost woi’d for word."’
1 Migne, op. cit. 158, 349, after 1150.
2 Quaestiones in III Reg., Qu. X, Migne, op. cit. 80, 67G.
3 n vorpiov to ،،’EXaX^ae Trepl TWV fyXwv . ٠ Kat Tas (putreis Kai Tas SwdfjLeis Kat
TWV floTavtav Kai TWV ررر0مجئة Kai pIvTOL Kai dXbywv ولائء TTCipvffioXoyrjK&ai aurbv etp-qKev'
¿vTevOev olfiat Kai Tas larpLKas flIflXovs avyypa ؤاً عةةاً ٧هقك fibpiov tIvos iraQovs ake^KpapfiaKOv‘ olov 7] balpvs x°\fb $ ٢٥ Xebvreiov (Frtap, 7) TO
Tavpetov alpca, T&v ¿xvidwv al ffdpKes. 7repl Tofrrwv yap ol (rotpol tCov laTpwv avyyeypdfpaaiv,
كاج tGjv I،o\o|٠٢l TWV to.؟ aopp،a؟. I III Iteg. Quaest’
xviii, Migne, op. cit. 80. Jerome perhaps has the same idea. See his Quaest.
Hebr. in libr. Ill Reg. (Migne. Patr. Lat. 23, 1365 f.): Disputavit enim de naturis
lignorum, jumentorum, reptilium, et piscium, de vi videlicet et naturis illorum.. .
4 Com. ad III Reg. 2 35 and 4 33Ø› Migne, op. cit. 87 1, 1152, 11.
5 Quaest. xli, Migne, op. cit. 89, 589f.

McCOWN: The Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 11
Georgios Monachos and Kedrenos make use of Question 10,1 and
they unite with Glykas in passing on the claim that the origin of
all medical books was to be found in the writings of Solomon. 2
A third item in Christian tradition regarding Solomon is the
account of the suppression of a part of the books he had written
by Hezekiah. Speculation was natural as to what had become of
all the books which Solomon had written, the three thousand proverbs
and the one tliousand and five songs, not to mention his medical,
magical, and other scientific works. So far as our sources are
preserved, the first to answer this question was Hippolytos in his
commentary on Canticles, parts of which are preserved in Armenian,
Syriac, Slavic, and Georgians The Quaestiones of Anastasios Sinaites
give a quotation or summary of a discussion found in-the Georgian
translation. In Question 41 Anastasios .collects several ancient
references to the wisdom and the writings of Solomon. To the
quotation from Theodoret which we have already mentioned he adds
Sap. 7 16—21 and 1 Kgs. 5 9ft'., and tlien continues: ؛؛From the
writing of Hippolytos on the Song of Songs. And where is all tliis
rich knowledge? Where are these mysteries? Where are the books?
For there have been handed down only the Proverbs (and.Wisdom)
and Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs. What then? Do the
Scriptures lie? God forbid! But a certain considerable portion of
the writings had become mere ballast, as the expression ؛song of
songs’ shows, for it signifies that whatever the five thousand odes
contained has been included in the one. But in the days of Heze-
kiah some of tlie books were chosen and some were rejected . . .”4
Ø› Migne, op. cit. 110, 249; 121, 197D f.
2 These are the writings whicli were suppressed by Hezekiah. See Migne,
op. cit. 110, 249; 121, 224; 158, 248.
Ù¥ See Bonwetsch, Hippolyts Kom. z. Hohelied in Texte u. Unters. NF VIII
(23, H. 2, 22f.) and the Kirchenvater Kommission, ed. I 343ff.
4 ؛ ل0١آلأزد٦K TOO el؟ TO صاج TWV امتآ TTOO iraoa ٦١ irKooola ٦ ٣٩ل١هvGiOt١’؟
irou 5ج Ta pAMJTypia raura; Kai TTOV al /5٤/3Xo،; apatptpoPTai yap pbvai at Trapoiplai [Kai لأ (TO0٤a]
Kai ة ¿KKX7](ria(FT7]S Kai TO SicrpLa TUP iapaTUv. ri ovv ; ٦۶e٥5erat 7) ypatjrq; 7 لأملم¿POITO ٠ aXXa
ttoWt] p£p TVS vXt] yeytpryrai TUP ypappaTUP, ۵؟ SyXoc rd X&yeip ftirpa qxrpdTUP* (TTjpa[pel yap
٥r، Otra TTepielxov al 7T€PTaKicrxlXuu cpdal ep Tip خpl diyyyaaro• kp rats 7]/j,£pais ’Efadou Ta
ض TUP ftiflXLup ¿ZeUyytrap, Ta 5ج Kai TTepiibfpOytrap . . . Migne, op. cit. 89, 589f. The
Quaestiones in their present form are not original but that does not affect the
Ù¢egoing discussion since the material is quoted. See Krumbacher, Geschichte

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
It is evidently the same tradition which Jerome has in mind when
he speaks of certain “writings of Solomon which were antiquated
and did not continue in memory.”؛
When we come to the end of Question 41 of Anastasios we make
the interesting discovery that he ascribes to the “archaeological
history of Eusebios Pamphilos” an account of a drastic revision of
Solomon’s writings by Hezekiah. “The books of Solomon”, he says,
“written by him concerning tlie parables and odes, in which lie
discoursed concerning tlie nature of plants and all kinds of animals,
land, winged, and aquatic, and cures of every disease, Hezekiah
suppressed because the people secured' the treatments for their
diseases there and failed to ask and look away to God for their
cures”. 2 Is this appeal to the autliority of Eusebius naisleading?
We do not know the date O1٠ authoi’ship of tlie Quaestiones in their
present form, but whoever the writer of Question 41 was, lie quotes
accurately from Theodoret and from a lost work of Hippolytos. The
presumption is that he may be trusted also in his quotation from
Eusebius, who may well have known what' was evidently the official
Jewish opinion regarding tlie revision of Solomon’s works by Hezekiah,
referred to in the Talmud and explained by Rashi as here. It is worth
while adding that there seems to be a Slavic “Archaeology of Eusebios
Pamphilos” whicli strangely enough begins with a ref'erence to Solomon.'؟
Succeeding Christian writers combine the tradition given by Hippo-
lytos witli that of Eusebios, 01’, sometimes, report tliem separately.
The encyclopaedia of Joseplios Clii’istianos called the Hypomnestikon
mentions the revision of the Pi’overbs in chapter 120 and tlie
suppression of the magical writings in chapter 74.4 Georgios Monachos
Ø› Aiunt Hebraei cum inter cetera scripta Salomonis quae antiquata sunt, nec
in memoria duraverunt, et bic liber (Eccl.) obliterandus videretur . . . ex loc
capitulo mei’uisse autoritatem. Com. in Eccl. :12131'.
2 Evaefllov napuplXov ¿K TT¡s apxa،oX٥7،٩s LtTToplas. Tas 53/،5/ جXous TOU I0X0/J.G3VT0S, ras
irepl T۵J, 7rapa/5oX۵p Kai ،p5۵p, تمV as 7rep، (pvrujp Kai iravTolaw وسي٠ك (¡MrioXoyfyras (1. tyvaio-
ع7،٢?،7ة١) xepaalaw, TTCTEIVUV Te Kai v7]KTb)v> Kai lapLarajv irdhjs 7ra 0S, 7pa0e٤aas avrip, a bta TO Ta؟ Gepairda؟ TUJV voaiawv ؛vBev KOjxlCeaOaL TOP ١abv ١ Kai irepiopav
alreiv Kai 7rapopav evTGvOev 7rapa 7 ئن6هas aces. Migne, op. cit. 89, 592D f. Cf. Mai-
monides and Rashi, aboÙ§e p. 6.
3 Bonwetsch, in Harnack, Altchr. Lit. I ii, 900.
4 Migne, وه?, cit.■, 106, 124, and 89 c. Unfortunately there is 1’oom for difference
.of opinion as to the date of the work. Schurer, Gesek des jild. Volkes 4 III 420,
seems to incline to 800 or earliei’.

McCOWN: The Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 13
combines part of the quotation from Eusebios mentioning its source.Ø›
Kedrenos quotes Monachos with an additional clause borrowed from
Synkellos or Suidas.2 Glykas presents a somewhat independent
account of Solomon’s glory and wisdom, but his account of Hezekiah’s
revision is so confused as to seem to make it fall after Ezra. As
authorities he appeals to “the most wise Psellos,” in wliich he is
mistaken, and to Eusebios.3 These three so introduce a clause from
Anastasios Sinaites as to make it appear that the books which
Hezekiah suppressed were those from which all the medical wisdom
of antiquity was derived.*
A fourth and independent motif; like that which Shemtob found
in Zahravi and among the Christians of Marseilles, is introduced by
Georgios Synkellos and Suidas. The former, when describing Solomon’s
reign, contents himself with writing most concisely of his wisdom and
his fall. In his account of Hezekiah’s reign, after expanding 2 Kings 184,
he adds, “And there was a certain writing of' Solomon engraved on
the gate of the temple containing a cure for every disease, and the
people, turning to this and thinking to have their cures from it,
despised God. Wherefore also Hezekiah chiseled it away in order
that the sick might turn to God.” ج Suidas shortens the account and
puts /?،/?Aos lafiaT(!)V for 7ا').زهم Kedrenos seems to have some idea
of this tradition for he speaks of a “book of healing of Solomon for
every disease which was engraved,” where, he does not say, and he
makes Hezekiah “burn and destroy” it.؟
The story of Hezekiah’s destruction of Solomon’s magical writings
crops out in a most interesting way in the latest recension of the
Testament of Solomon,8 and what is still more remarkable it is
1 Migne, op. cit. 110, 149, 273.
2 Ibid. 121, 200B, 2240. See below.
3 Ibid. 158, 348 f. For Fsellos see ibid. 122, 537, 540.
4 For example Glykas says: TOC؟ TOU 3) ؟٣0م0ح0كl{3Xovs, ¿0’ وس Kai OL TOW larpGw
؟racSe؟ Ta؟ atpopp,as و0ةر0حج . . . irapa ’E&kIov KaKaucrdal (pyaiv ة TToXupadys Kai iroXuiaTojp
E٥٠o. Migne, op. cit. 158, 348D.
5 Tjv Kai ؟™و۵ءلم0٨0ة ypcKpy 7 s ¿yKCKoXapaepy TT¡ TTuXy TOU vaou 700٥٠ ؟70وaT0S &K0S
لآ ١هاًل0١ةا9ع٦٢ irpoa^F 0 \ao؟ Kai TO،؟ Qepair a١؟ vop.ttop.evo؟ Ka-٠€٢pbvet 70ذاً Qeov. bto
Kai Taiuryv ’Etezaaو€م١ححقنحه ؟ ،va 7raaovres T۵ 0€U) 7سسسةص0م٢.
6 Lexicon s. V. ’Efe as.
7 /3؟70سلم0^0ة و٤0ح3/غ lapaTypLOv 70 TO؟ iradovs ey KeKoXapptvov ٠ a ae Kai ytpavure.
Migne, op. cit. 121, 200 8, 224C.
8 See below p. 17.

14 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
implicitly combined with the idea of a contract between the demons
and Solomon engraved on stone, exactly the same collocation of
ideas that Shemtob took from Zahravi and the Christians of Mar-
seilles.1 Aside from a ،،Prologue” and a few verses at the beginning,
Recension C of the Testament of Solomon runs very much like the
earlier ones until near the end of chapter 9. From this point on an
entirely different set of demons and of ideas is introduced. In
chapter 13, then, the attempt is made to authenticate this ،،new
testament” in a unique fashion. Solomon’s chief familiar, here
named Paltiel Tzamal, requests him to promise that this, the real
testament, shall be left to his sons only, and that, after his death,
(sic) he shall make for Hezekiah another testament for the world at
large, while this, the true one, shall be hidden and not open to the
common herd, ،،for,” he adds, ،،Hezekiah, O king, ٦vill burn many
books handed down from the fathers and many others he will hide,
and he will establish the world and the superfluous he will cut off.”
Solomon then secures the name of the angel which truly frustrates
all the demons — it is agla — and makes an agreement with the
demon that Hezekiah shall burn all but one copy of this true testa-
ment, which is to be engraved on stone, but shall spread abroad in
the world the other testament which the demons shall give him as
a joke and delusion.2 It is, 1 think, quite evident that the author
of this recension has gone out from the two ideas which Shemtob
brings together, of a contract between Solomon and the demons
which along with medical recipes was engraved on white marble and
the added idea, common both to Christian and Jewish tradition,
that Hezekiah Ù¦vas to destroy or at least lessen the number of
Solomon’s magical writings.3
An interesting aspect of the literary tradition regarding Solomon
magus is to be found in the anti-Jewish polemics of Christian writers.
The earliest reference of this kind I know is to be found in the
Dialogue of Timothy and Aquila, which dates probably from the
1 See above p. 7.
2 This recension is found in MS No. 3632 of the Bologna University Library,
ff. 475 ff., and No. 2419, Ane. fonds grecs, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, ff. 266 ff.
See the forthcoming edition by the writer, to be published by Hinrichs in
Professor Hans Windisch’s TJntersuchungen zwm NT.
3 Glykas uses the word ،٥X،7۶7٥٠«'. See above p. 13.

McCOWN: The Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 15
first half of the fifth century. The Christian is arguing the messiah-
ship of Jesus and applies to him the second Psalm. The Jew replies
that this psalm referred to Solomon, not to the messiah. To meet
this statement tlie Christian attacks the reputation of Solomon,
quoting parts of the speech of Ahijah to Jeroboam,Ø› and concluding
with an appeal to the story of Solomon’s fall as "written in his
Testament.,” the Jewish-Christian work of the third century. 2 Aside
from the light it throws on anti"Jewish polemics, this passage is
interesting mainly because it shows the earliest and most important
of the pseudo-Solomonic magical works fully accepted and highly
honored among the Christians of the fifth, century. -The writer of
tlie Dialogue claims a greater trustworthiness for the Testament than
for the Book of Kings. “On this I take nay stand with confidence,'
because this is not revealed at the hand of the historian but is
known from the mouth of Solomon himself.,’3
Jewish polemics did more than apply many passages which the
Christians regarded as messianic to Solomon. They also claimed
that Solomon had subdued the demonic hosts, thus undermining the
Christian argument that Jesus was the messiah because he had
overthrown the kingdom of Beelzebul. The Testament of Solomon
seems on the whole to be entirely unaware of this conflict of claims.
All that distinctly appears in what can be confidently claimed as its
original form as a Christian document is that Christ, or Immanuel,
or the cross are the accepted means for frustrating the evil machi-
nations of the demons. The fact that Solomon fell is not allowed
to weaken faith in the charms he has discovered, on the contrary it
is turned to account by making a demon f'oretell it and by that
very means convince him, and the reader also, of course, that all
that he had learned from the demons is true.4 Christ is represented
merely as ,the one who will eventually rule the demons, as in a sense
a greater successor to Solomon.^
1 1 Kings 11 31-36.
2 See below p. 17. The Dialogue is published by F. c. Conybeare, in Anec-
(lota Oxon. Classical ser. VIII; see p. 70.
3 b TOVTO yap t(TT7]v iruTTOTTOiwv, ¿7"، OVK b %€ipl ItTTOpioypaipov ¿(pavcp&e7] 7070, اح١غ b
roO (TrbpuTos avrov TOV وهئرر7¿ ك٢0سه،م0ح0ق TOVTO. Loc. cit.
4 Ch. 15 8-14.
5 Ch. 15 11. This is found only in the manuscripts of Recension B and may
be secondary, Faris, Anc. fonds grecs 38, Jerus., s. Sab. 422.

16 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
Christian writers who have been more thoroughly indoctrinated take
a different tone. Leontios of Constantinople in his sermon In mediam
Pentecostem, while discussing the cure of the man with a legion of
demons, suddenly begins an anti-Solomonic polemic. ،،To whom,” he
says, ،،did the legion of demons say, ،If you cast us out, allow us to
enter the herd of swine’? To Solomon who built Jerusalem, or to
the Lord Christ who holds all things in his hand? But the demon-
loving Je٦vs will say at once, ،،What then? Did not Solomon master
the demons? Did he not shut them up one and all? Do they not
fear him to this day?’ But, 0 demon-deceived Jews, you appeal to
these arguments ip vain. For the Lord Christ alone bound the
strong one Ù¦vith might and plundered his goods. For Solomon not
only did not royally master the demons but even was mastered and
destroyed by them at the end. For, loving the lust of polygamy,
seduced by the procuration of the devil, ... he defiled the marriage-
bed of divine knowledge . . . How then is the servant of demons
master of demons?”1
The same argument appears in the Disputation wrongly ascribed
to G-regentius of Taphar. Herb an, the Jew, claims that Solomon
had ruled all the demons. The archbishop is made to reply, ،،Solomon
humbled demons? You do not known what you are maintaining.
For a time he did secure them in his vessels and sealed and buried
them. But look Ù¦vith me at the time that he was completely defeated
by the demons themselves and, being overthrown, Ù¦vas in danger of
losing his salvation, in that he offered incense to the abominations
of deceit.”2 Where there were no arguments with Jews, and that
includes the greater part of Christendom, this conflict of claims did
not arise and Solomon was vieÙ¡ved as a great magician whom God
had endowed with wisdom for ،،help and healing to men.”
Turning now from the literary tradition, that handed down by
quotation from earlier sources, to the living tradition, that which
1 See Migne, I. c. 86, 1980. According to Krumbacher, Gesch. d. byz. Lit. 55
and 191, this homily is to be ascribed to a Constantinopolitan presbyter, Leontios,
and not to any one of the better kno٦٦7n fathers of that name. His date is uncertain.
2 Migne, I. c.

McCOWN: The Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 17
gives contemporary evidence of an actual faith in Solomon’s magical
powers and wisdom, we find our earliest document in the Testament
of Solomon, already mentioned. Josephus and the magical papyri
are witnesses to a living faith among Jews and to a certain extent
among the heathen. The Testament witnesses to faith among Jews
and Christians, for it consists of Jewish material worked over and
combined with heathen and Christian material by a Christian. The
basis is the story, no doubt borrowed from the Jews, of Solomon’s
use of demons in building the temple, really an attempt to glorify
the temple by representing it as the product of more than human
skill.2 As the work proceeds, a vampire attempts to hinder it by
attacking the chief architect, a favorite slave of Solomon. To save
him Michael brings the famous ring from heaven and with its help
Solomon calls all the demons before him, learns their characteristics,
including the diseases and ills they cause, and the angel name or
charm that frustrates them, and sets them to work at various difficult
tasks about the temple.
The original purpose of the writer Ù¡vas to collect about the name
of Solomon all the magico-medical knowledge he had. Of the story
which he made the framework of his ،،novel with a purpose” we have
two late Christian recensions. A comparison of these works with the
Testament shows how far tradition had already gone before the time
of the Testament in collecting stories of Solomon’s dealings with the
demons. The Ù¦vriter of the Testament gave a mighty impulse to this
development by ascribing to Solomon a large number of demonological
and magical traditions that came from the most diverse sources,
Babylonian, Persian, Jewish, Greek, and Egyptian. The successive
recensions of the original story and of the Testament show this
process still going on. For example, the second recension of the
Testament and a late modern Greek recension of the story both add
an account of Solomon’s shutting the demons up in vessels, the latter
going on to tell ho١١T the Chaldeans, when they took Jerusalem,
1 The Testament is¡ to be sure, the earliest document referring to this
legend, and Jewish legend does not, I think, make so much of it as does
Arabic. Yet it hardly so likely that it wÙ¢ould develop among Christians as
among Jews.

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
opened the seals hoping to find treasure, and thus let the demons
out again to prey upon mankind.1
Next to the Testament, the most important magical work ascribed
to Solomon is the Clavicula, the ،،key of Solomon,” which all during
the Middle Ages and down into modern times enjoyed a reputation
which the Testament never had. A Ù  mass of manuscripts in Latin,
French, Italian, English, and other European languages, shows w.hat
tremendous popularity it had. In occultist circles it is still thought
worthy of translation and publication in these days of science.2
Various recensions exist also in Greek and deserve publication for
the light they throÙ¦v on astrology and magic. The work is really a.
treatise on these subjects, as the Testament is a treatise in story
form on medical magic. The most striking feature in the many
manuscripts I have seen is the large number of ،،pentacles ” drawings,
usually circular in form, often including magical words or sentences,
and intended as charms or amulets against evil spirits, diseases, or
other woes to which the flesh is heir. These are sometimes said to
be the seals on the ring of Solomon, sometimes the ،،signs” of the
demons. Recension C of the Testament has borrowed from this
literature twelve seals for the ring and a list of fifty demons and
their ،،signs.” Perhaps the most valuable element in the Clavicula
is to be found in the numerous prayers to the planets, which seem
to contain ancient material. The date of the Clavicula and of the
ØŒYypo/zavTeta, as it is often called in Greek manuscripts, has not been
determined. It is certainly later than the Testament, but goes well
back into the first millennium of our era.3 4
It is impossible even to catalogue the many works ascribed to
Solomon in the Middle Ages, such as Seyher Raziel and Semiyhoras.*
They are a sadly confused and wearisome mass of cabbalistic and
1 See the writer’s Testament of Salomon, already mentioned above, p. 14. The
interesting modern Greek version is found in codex No. 290 of the St. Sabbas
manuscripts in tlie library of the Greek Patriarchate in Jerusalem.
2 S. L. M. Mathers, Clavicula Salomonis, London, 1888. For a Hebrew trans-
lation see above p. 8.
3 See Reitzenstein, Poimandres 186 f., and The Testament of Solomon, Intro
duction II 4 and VIII 3.
4 See Steinschneider, Hebr. Ãœbers. 937, Scheibel, Das Kloster III 289 ff., Horst,
Zauberbibliothek passim, Seligsohn, art. ،،Solomon, Apocryphal ٦١Torks,” in Jewish
Enc. 44٦١٠لأ٢

McCO١١٢N: The Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 19
occultist superstitions which do neither Solomon nor their authors
credit. But they testify to the high esteem in which Solomon magus
was held and their number as well as the frequency of copies of the
more popular ones prove that the practice of magic in Solomon’s
name was widespread.
Equally important evidence on this point is to be found in the
lists of prohibited books. In the Decretum Gelasiamm, the Collectio
HerovaUiana, and pseudo-Isidor, de Muneris, mention is made of a
Salomonis interdictio, or contradictio, and of phylacteria which contain
the names, not of angels, but of demons،1 There can be little doubt
that the Clavicida is one of the books thus forbidden. Whether the
Testament is intended in the title Interdict™ is questionable، In
any case the prohibition proves that Solomonic’ books were in
popular use.
Again there are allusions in mediaeval Christian writers which
are not merely quoted from some older authority but come from the
authors’ own knowledge as to the use of Solomonic books or incan-
tations. The JELypomnestikon, for example, following its reference to
the suppression of Solomonic writings by Hezekiah, continues, ،،But
those which drive demons away and cure diseases and discover
thieves the ،fakirs’ of the Jews guard among themselves most care-
fully, although the faithful of the holy church do not use these, since
they have been taught by their faith in Christ to keep themselves
pure.”2 Whoever he ٦vas and whenever he ١vrote — and there is no
reason Ù¦vhy the passage should not come from the fifth or sixth
century—,٠ the author is not quoting any known description of
Solomonic magical works, but, in all probability, telling of books he
knew from personal knowledge.
At the end of the twelfth century Niketas Akominates, or Choniates,
a high official in the Byzantine court, knew an interpreter, sycophant
and magician at court named Aaron. He had a ،،Solomonic book
which, when it was unrolled and gone through, collected the demons
by legions and made them stand ready, answering continually for
what they were to be called upon, hastening to carry out the thing
1 ►See E. von Dobschiitz, “Das Decretum Gel., etc.,” in Texte u. Unters. (1912)
13, 11, 332—335; 84, 11, U2f.; 74, 11, 242-245, see also p. 319.
2 Migne, op. cit. 106, 89 c. See above p. 12.

20 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
enjoined, and observing zealously that commanded.”؛ This is an
almost exact description of the Clavicula and of the new part of
Recension c of the Testament. There can be little doubt that Niketas,
who wrote from personal recollection, had actually seen a performance
in which some such book was used.
It is equally clear that Michael Glykas knew the Testament. He
says that Solomon ٤٤also made a book of his concerning demons,
how they are brought down and in what forms they appear. He
wrote also their natures and peculiarities, and how they are bound
and how they are driven, away from places they love to inhabit.
Wherefore he enjoined upon them work of carrying burdens and
forced them, as it is said, to fell timber and required them to carry
that which was bought on their shoulders, and swollen bowels he
cured by incantations or by binding herbs about them.”2 Only the
name is lacking t٠0 make the identification of this ؛‘book about
demons” with the. Testament complete,, for it is throughout concerned
with bringing demons down, with describing their forms, natures,
and peculiarities, with telling how they are driven from their lurking-
places, how they are set to work, carrying burdens and cutting wood,
among other things, and how cures are wrought by means of' incan-
tations and herbs.
Tui’ning from books to amulets and talismans, one finds an *equal
abundance of material. Every large museum lias evidence that the
books of Solomonic ؛؛pentacles” in their manuscript collections were
not mere jeux d’esprit on 'the part of monks or others who had no
better employment that drawing pictures. Amulet after amulet proves
that'Solomon’s was in truth a name ؛٤to conjure with.” It appears
in many different connections, only a f'ew examples of which can be
given here. It is found, for example,' on so-called Gnostic amulets.
On a bronze nail in the British Museum is the inscription:
(1) ABARAXAS- ASTRAEL* (2) IAO SABAO* * (3) (Draw-
ing of serpent) (4) SOLOMONO 3.* ÙŠ It is combined with heathen
1 Migne, رؤه. cit. 86, 641 f. 2 Migne, op. cit. 158, 349.
٦٦حا١ة٢ب٦ .أناً لأ Cat. of Bronzes ilthe Brit. Museum, Greek, Roman, and
Etruscan. London 1899, p. 370, No. 3192. Henzen, Bull. d. Inst, di Corr. Arch.
1849, p. 11, cites from a magic nait AO SABAO SOLOMONO, and Wessely,
Ephesia Grammata 22, 202, tao (toXo/jmv (rafiao from Montfaucon, Tab. 164. The.
nail given in the text is no doubt the one mentioned by ل alm, ‘؛Aberglaube des
bosen Blicks,” Ber. d. sacks. Gesell, d. !!7¿’ss. 1855, p. 1.08.

McCOAVN: The Christian Tradition as to the Magical Wisdom of Solomon 21
deities. Another nail in the British Museum carries a long inscription
beginning DOMNA ARTEMIX and concluding TER DICO TER
Solomon often appears in the role of St. George, dressed as a
knight in mediaeval armor riding a horse and piercing a dragon 0آا
some other enemy with 'his lance, for example, on a hematite amulet
in tie Bibliothèque Nationale at Baris. The obverse bears the-legend
ورزلندم0د0ت the reverse ojpayus 1 2 3 4 5.طلح Schlumberger cites a similar amulet
with the same legends in which the rider is spearing a seated, naked
woman.3 Another Schlumberger bought in the bazaar at Smyrna.
In a circle around tlie edge of the medal was the legen.d,
croXopMVOS aTToSiogov irav KOLKOV a7TO TOV ())0p0VVT0. In tlie field was the
word (¡)Oovos, in the center an eye, above it three daggers pointing
at it, on each side a rampant, lion, below an ibis (or an ostrich), a
serpent, and a scorpion, with the figure of a female demon at the
bottom. On the other side was a figure of a rider spearing the same
demon and the circular legend favye هرز€عءرة7)ةهم€عم (ToXopbov ة€ Blokl cnmvvLos
(rimvapLos. Thus Solomon is to protect from the demon of envy that
works in the evil eye.-Ø›
A similar but more complicated amulet from Cyzicus bears on
one side the legend, /2tya7?À, 7د7لآ،ه, ovpLïjX, pacjia?طه٤ة ودو£ov TGV
(/زopovvra aycos aycos aytos LTTLTT RBSSS, and on the other, (¡)evye pipLimjJLm
(ToXofiov ÔLOKL are (tfat) ayyeXos apaa٦۶. The interpretation of details both
in the legends and the 'figures is difficult but apparently the maker
wished to combine as many powers as possible ‘in his effort to
counteract the evil eye, and Solomon was one that he could not
afford to ignore. ٠٦
1 »See ١Valters, loc. cit., No. 3191, and Jahn, op. cit., p. 107.
2 ha bouillet, Cat. des Camées de la Bib. Imp. p. 299, No. 2218؛ cl', also No. 2219.
3 Revue des Études Grecs V (1892) 84.
4 Ibid. p. 93.
5 Dorigny gives this amulet in Revue des Études Grecs IV (1891) 287—296
under tlie title “Phylactère Alexandrin contre les epistaxis,” basing his inter-
pi’etation upon an ingenious but, I am sure, fanciful explanation of the word
apaaxp, which he reads apaafp and derives fi’om ٩y٦, “to run drop by drop.”
'AyyeXos Apadfp is, therefore, tile demon ol' nosebleed. It is dil'ficult to determine
whether the last letter of the woi’d is م٦ or 0. But the chief objection to this
interpretation is that an etymology based upon a woi’d wi’itten in Greek letters
is altogether too uncertain unless there is other sti’ong confirmatory evidence.

Journal of ØŒlie Palestine Oriental Society
Appeal is made to the seal of Solomon for protection times Ù¡vithout
number. Aside from the occurrences already mentioned above one
may take as examples another of Schlumberger’s amulets which bears
on the obverse the figures of an angel and a dog (or lion?) attacking
a demon with the circular legend, favye pbepLLfnpAVL apXafj) O ayy€/\/\oç ere
Slokl, and on the reverse various signs and figures with the legend,
(repayes croXojjLovos (fivXaTE TOV (¡)Opowra.i De Longperier gives an amulet
of chalcedony with the inscription (repayas (TaXwpKoyv Kvpios NAI'H'T.2
Dikewise appea.l is made to the “covenant” of Solomon with the
demons in a gold amulet from Italy. It was seen and copied by
Amati in 1829 in the shop of an antiquity dealer in Rome. Amati
gave a copy to Professor Emiliano Sorti and this was published in
1889 by Professor Gaetano Pellicioni. The copy was made in
imitation of tile very crabbed lettei’s of tlie original. Beginning with
a line of magical, or at least non-Greek letters,, it exorcised all kinds
of demons and magical potencies “by, the great and holy name-of
AtØ› (whoever that may be), the Lord God of Adam and Alam and
Adonai and Iao and Sabaoth -not to touch the woman who weai’S
this exorcism,” “remembering the covenant they made with the great
Solomon and Michael tlie angel, that they swore the great and holy
oath by the name of God and said, ‘We will flee, we will not violate
the oath’.”3 So we find a persistent, living tradition as t'O the “covenant”
whicli Solomon made with the demons, references to wliich we have
already found in the literary sources.4
Thug in Solomonic tradition as elsewhere in Greek Christian
literature the two meanings of h.Opia] meet, and cross. Were there
and such is wanting in this case. For other examples of Solomon as a knight
see the collection in the Berlin Museum, Saal X, Schautisch F 2, Nos. 9932,
10640 10641, Ausführliches Verzeichniss 1894, P. 297, and see Dorigny, “Salomo
als Reiter,” in Rev. des Études Grecs IV (1891) 217—296.
1 Op. cit. p. 93. The reading of Heim, Incant magica {op. cit. supra, p. 6),
p٠.481, Nos. 61 and 62, (pevyé /UL€, fjLiaov/jLcvv, is indefensible.
1 Comptes red. des secmees de 1١Acad, des inscr. et belleslet. لآلآ دال.
See the article ؟0ح۵ملم0ح0ة ئ،٠7م0ة, by Perdrizet in Rev. des Études Grecs 1903, 42 fl'.
3 irav Tvevfia /¿vyaôévra TTp (so my copy, not 7> or ؤو) ëôevTO Girl fjÆyaXov
2oX٠a،۵po؟ Kai MexetXov TOV àyyéXov 07"، &{JL0(jav TOV [jlyav Kai âyiôv opKOV èTil TOV ovopaTOS
TOW 60 Kat dirav OTL 4>ه0علاةعلاع, opKOV ov ٦p؟vc٢6p0؛a. At e memorie delle RR. deputa-
zioni di, storia patria per te prorincie dell’ Emilia. Ahon *Serie, xd. دهد١لآةلآ ,آ
(Modena 1880) 177ff. Cf. Wessely, in Wiener Studien A III (1886) 179, Schlum-
berger. Rev. Et. Gr. V 87.
4 See above pp. 7, 14f.

McCOWN: Tlie Christian Tradition as to the Magical 'Wisdom of Solomon 23
originally two separate motifs, one of the "covenant” between Solomon
and the demons, the other of the last will and “testament” which
the wise 1 ing left telling all he ha.d learned about them? Or did
one of these ideas arise out of the other by misunderstanding or
conscious development? So far as I have been able to discover, the
Testament is older than any allusion to the “covenant.” That may
be pure accident. Yet it is easier to see how from the stories of
the Testament the tradition of the “covenant” should arise than vice
versa.[ In Recension c tlie Testament insensibly passes over into a
“covenant.” On the other hand the tradition as to the “covenant”
seems the more wide spread. Not only are there the allusions
already adduced from Christian, Hebrew and Arabic sources, but
Bezold gives “eine arabische Zauberformel gegen Epilepsie” from the
margin of a Berlin manuscript which mentions the Contract between
Solomon and the devils.2 And Vasiliev gives a Greek incantation
which contains a reference .to the demons’ oath.3
Weighing probabilities one is inclined to conclude that the idea
of a covenant between Solomon and the demons arose by natural
development out of the stories of his dealings with them, and that
the “testament” was independently suggested to some mind already
familiar with such documents as the Testament of Abraham, the
Testament of Adam, and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.
To the author, then, of Recension c of the Testament occurred the
brilliant idea of combining the two and thereby gaining added
circulation for his document.
In the early Christian centuries a living tradition showed itself
in a field so fertile that it is strange it was not longer cultivated.
To one who is familiar with the “sacred- places” of Palestine it is
not astonishing to learn that the pilgrim of Bordeaux in the fourth
century was. shown the cave where Solomon tortui’ed the demons,*
and that St. Sylvia saw his ring in Jerusalem during- the same
1 It is an interesting fact that the first translator of the Testament rendered
the title ,,covenant,” although in the recension that lay before him the idea is
not to be found. This was J. Fiirst, Der Orient, 5. Jahrgang 1844, 7. Jahr-
gang 1846, Literaturblatt, cols. 593, 663, 714, 741, “Der Bund Salomos.”
2 In ZA XX 3—4 (Aug. 1907) pp. lOoff., from Cod. (113) Sachau 199 (Konigl.
Bibliothek, Berlin), ff. 24b —27a; cf. esp. pp. llOf.
ج Anecdota Graeco-byzantina, خلآ<؟.لآ.
4 Tobler, Palest, descript. 1869, p. 3j Schurer, Gesch. ¿٠ jiid. Volkes 4 III 418.

24 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
century.1 It is strange some enterprising guide did not discover
some of the brass vessels in which the demons were sealed.
Long as this paper is, it gives but a part of the material that
comes from Christian sources and does not attempt more than to
touch the Semitic. It has been confined largely, moreover, to the
Greek and Latin world. Many details might be added by one who
knew Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Georgian, and the Slavic languages.
Again the subject was restricted to the tradition regarding the
magical wisdom of Solomon, thus leaving untouched a large field
that has to do with his judicial and his scientific wisdom, the many
books ascribed to him in this field, and the stories of his dialogues
with human or semi-demonic interlocutors.
Enough, however, has been adduced to illustrate several features
of the growth of tradition. Its almost insensible beginnings, gathering
slowly about a historical nucleus, the gradual accretions from sources
where similar motifs were at work, the adding of traits due some-
times merely to the Lust zum Fabiilieren, sometimes to a patriotic
motive, sometimes to literary ambition, sometimes to ،،scientific,”
medical or magical interest, the cross currents of theology and
polemics which tended to hinder development in one direction, while
stimulating it in another, the mutual fructification resulting from the
occasional contact of the literary and the living tradition, the omni-
vorousness of such a tradition, once it has well grown, its ability to
seize and apparently assimilate the most diverse and contradictory
elements, these are some of the features, common to all folklore,
which one sees in the Christian tradition regarding Solomon. Studies
which include other languages and peoples and comparisons with
other traditions would bring out still other characteristics of the
development of folklore. Along with that of Alexander the tradition
of Solomon offers one of the most fruitful fields of investigation.
1 Peregrinatio of St. Sylvia, or Etterea, published by Gannurrini. I owe the
reference to Dr. F. C. Conybeare. Ù 

F.-M. ABEL O. P.
IA inise à mort du prophète Isaie par le roi Manassé est un des
À éléments de la tradition juive les mieux attestes. Le Talmud
de Babylone y revient par deux fois, -contenant les deux particularités
que ,l’on retrouve dans le Talmud de Jérusalem: la caclrette disa٠ie
dans un cèdre qui sera scie, et l.a réference au texte de 2 Rois 2116
«Manassé répandit beaucoup de sang innocent jusqu’il en remplir
Jérusalem d’un bout à l’autre». Malgré le vague du renseignement,
ce verset peut comprendre implicitement un fait précis qu’on a jugé
bon de dissimuler et se référer اغ une tradition authentique. Il en
va autrement du sciage d’Isa'ïe dans le cèdre, trait qui appartient
au domaine du folklore iranien. Les rabbins ont seulement atténué
le réalisme horrible du supplice tel que le décrivait le récit primitif,
d’après lequel le héros réfugié dans' l’arbre est coupé avec lui. Dans
les récits talmudiques, on coupe le cèdre pour extraire le condamné
de sa cachette, ou bien le prophète meurt au moment où la scie va
«Lorsque Manassé se leva et se mit à courir après Isa'ie pour le
tuer, celui-ci put s’enfuir et se cacher dans un tronc de cèdre.
Comme des franges de son vêtement dépassait l’arbre, on s’en aperçut,
on le reconnut, et on vint en faire part au roi qui dit: Allons scier
l’arbre.؛ ce qui fut fait et l’homme fut découvert.»؛ Plus loin, la
part du roi dans l’exécution du prophète est clairement indiquée.
«N’est-il pas écrit: Manassé versa aussi beaucoup de sang etc.? Or
est-il possible à un être humain de remplir Jérusalem de sang
\ Talmud de Jérusalem, Sanhédrin, أداً .لم؟ ,ت. T. de Babylone, Sanhédrin, ٦ال
Yebamoth, 103bÙ 

26 Journal of tl e Palestine Oriental Society
innocent d’un bout à l’autre? On veut dire par la que le roi tua
Isaïe...» Une tradition relevée dans Yebamoth, 49b mentionne la
cachette du prophète dans le cèdre, mais lorsque la scie fut arrivée
à la bouche de la victime, son’ âme la quitta.
Que l’allusion de l’épître aux Hébreux (1137) aux saints qui ont.
été scies concerne véritablement Isa'ïe, c’est ce que l’on admet
aujourd’hui communément avec d’autant plus de facilité que l’existence
au Ier siècle d’un opuscule d’origine juive traitant du martyre de c٠e
prophète parait solidement établie. La tradition qu’il représente,
dépouillée de la circonstance légendaire du cèdre qui se referme,
était vraisemblablement reçue dans les milieux juifs avant l’ére
chrétienne. Ce Martyre a servi de source au compilateur chrétien
qui, aux environs de 150, rédigea l’Ascension d’Isaïe. Le fragment
utilisé représente le propliète en butte :١ l’hostilité d’un certain
Balkii , originaire de Samarie, sur lequel on est bien aise de
rejeter l’odieux de la conduite du roi. Circonvenus par l’imposteur.
Manasse et les princes de Juda se décident à faire arrêter le Voyant
qui a pi’étendu voir le Seigneur et qui a inflige le nom infâme de
Sodome à Jérusalem et traité de peuple de Gomorrhe les princes de
Juda. «Ils prirent donc (ajoute le l’écit) Isa'ïe, fils d’Amos et le
scièrent avec une scie de bois. Manassé, Balkirh, les faux prophètes,
les princes et le peuple, tous se tenaient debout le regardant. . . Et
tandisqu’il était scié, Isa'ïe ni ne cria ni ne pleura, mais sa bouche
parla à l’Esprit-Saint jusqua ce qu’il fut scie en deux.»؛ Cette
narration qui jouit d’un grand succès dans la littérature ecclésiastique
ne comporte aucune donnée topographique. 2
Si l’œuvré originale du Martyre contenait quelque indication de
lieu, le rédacteur de l’Ascension d’Isaïe l’a complètement négligée et
il est nécessaire pour la retrouver de recourir au curieux document
intitule Vies des Prophètes dont nous possédons plusieurs recensions
grecques et quelques abrégés syriaques. La plus connue de ces
recensions est celle que l’on attribue à s. Epiphane. On a tenté de
placer à l’origine de ces notices un opuscule hébreu ou araméen,
mais les tournures sémitiques s’expliquent suffisamment par le grec
aramaïsant parlé en Palestine. Pour sa notice sur Isa’ïe, l’auteur a
1 Tisserant, Ascension dlsaie, V, 11-14, P. 131.
2 Outre les allusions de Justin, Tertullien, Lactance, Hilaire, Ambroise etc.,
on a des mentions explicites dans Origene et Jérôme.

ABEL: Le Tombeau dTsa'ie
pu puiser ses renseignements dans des traditions locales déjà anciennes.
Il semble avoir connu le Martyre d’Isàie. On est incapable d’affirmer
cependant qu’il y ait puisé des circonstances topographiques omises
par V Ascension. Sans méconnaître l’incertitude qui règne au sujet
de la date des Vies des Prophètes, on ne risquerait pas de se tromper
beaucoup en optant pour le second siècle de notre ère, époque de
l’éclosion de maint apocryphe judéo-chrétien et des Mémoires d’ELégé-
sippe, réserve faite d’additions postérieures manifestement chrétiennes.
Le texte de la notice vaut d’être cité en entier:
1. «Le prophète Isàie, fils d’Amos, naquit à Jérusalem de la tribu
de Juda; ayant été mis à mort par Manassé, roi de Juda, scié en
deux, il fut enseveli sous le chêne de Rogel, près du passage des
eaux que le roi Ézéchias avait fait disparaître en les comblant.
Dieu fit le miracle de Siloé en faveur du prophète, qui, pris de
défaillance avant de mourir, demanda à boire de l’eau. Aussitôt il
lui en fut envoyé de cette source, laquelle, pour cette raison, fut
appelée Siloé qui signifie «envoyé».»
2. «Du temps du roi Ézéchias, avant que celui-ci n’eût fait creuser
les citernes et les piscines, il était sorti un peu d’eau à la prière du
prophète Isàie, le peuple étant investi par les étrangers, afin que
la ville ne pérît pas de soif. Les ennemis se demandaient: D’où
boivent-ils l’eau? ignorant le fait. Tout en maintenant la ville en
respect, ils vinrent camper à Siloé. Quand les Juifs venaient puiser,
l’eau de la source s’élevait, et ils s’approvisionnaient; les étrangers
venaient-ils, ils n’en trouvaient pas, l’eau avait fui. Aussi jusqu’à ce
jour, l’eau arrive subitement pour manifester ce prodige. Et parce
que ceci avait eu lieu par l’intermédiaire d’Isa’ie, le peuple, en souvenir,
l’ensevelit avec soin et honneur près de la source pour que par ses
prières on ait toujours la jouissance de cette eau. Le peuple reçut
un oracle à ce sujet. Le tombeau du prophète Isàie est à côté du
tombeau des rois, derrière le tombeau des prêtres au midi. En
bâtissant Jérusalem, Salomon avait fait le tombeau des rois suivant
un plan tracé par David. C’est à l’orient de Sion, qui a une entrée
depuis Gabaoth, à une distance de vingt stades de la ville; et il la
fit tortueuse, compliquée, insoupçonnable, aussi est-elle jusqu’à ce jour
inconnue du grand nombre.»
3. «Le roi Salomon avait là l’or d’Ethiopie et les aromates.
Comme Ezéchias avait dévoilé le secret de David et de Salomon

28 Journal of tbe Palestine Oriental Society
aux gentils et avait profané les ossements de ses ancêtres. Dieu jura
de livrer sa postérité en esclavage à ses ennemis. A partir de ce
jour. Dieu le priva de descendance.»؛
L’originalité de cette notice consiste à établir une relation étroite
entre Isa’ie et la fontaine de Siloé, quitte à embellir l’histoire
d’ornements légendaires. Ce prophète, d’après la Bible, avait reproche
à Ézechias et à ses sujets d’accorder trop de confiance aux travaux
hydrauliques destines ٠à capter tout le débit de la source dans un
nouveau réservoir placé hors de l’atteinte des ennemis. Il semble
même avoir pris partie pour l’ancien canal de Siloe que le tunnel
d’Ézéchas allait rendre inutile, en se plaignant du mépris qu’on
avait pour les eaux de Siloé qui coulent doucement. Is. 8 6. A l’aide
de ces réminiscences une éxégèse peu scrupuleuse aura vite fait
honneur au Voyant de ces eaux si utiles à l’ancienne ville. Le
prophète en aurait donc provoque un premier jaillissement en petite
quantité et par intermittences, afin de soulager ses concitoyens
menaces de périr de soif pendant un siège. Peut-être l’auteur a-t-il
pensé alors à cette invitation d’Isa'iel2 3: «Vous puiserez des eaux
avec joie aux sources du salut . La seconde fois, la source aurait
jailli en faveur d’Isa’ïe pris de défaillance au moment de son supplice.
A sa prière, de l’eau lui est envoyée miraculeusement, et ainsi,
suivant notre légende, s’explique le nom de Siloé qui signifie «envoyé»),
étymologie déjà, donnée par Joh. 9 7. L’hypothèse de deux récits
parallèles ne manque pas de fondement et le doublet se poursuit à
propos de la sépulture du héros.
Le premier récit (1), qui a surtout pour but d’expliquer l’étymologie
du nom de Siloé, situe cette sépulture sous le chêne de Rogel près
du passage des eaux obturées par Ezéchias. Le second récit (2),
qui s’attache surtout au phénomène de l’intermittence, place le
tombeau dlsaie près de la sortie des eaux, dans la proximité du
tombeau des rois et du tombeau des prêtres. Le premier fait tout
graviter autour du supplice, le second autour de 1’épisode du siège.
Mis en parallèle avec le chêne de Débora ou le térébinthe de
Jabes sous lequel furent enfouis les os de Saul et de ses fils,
1 Migne, P. G., XLIII, 397. ScherMANN, Propheten und Apostellegenden,
Texte und Unters., XXXI, 3, p. 74SS. Sur !’interprétation de ee texte voir
١لآغالاغه-.ار٢ Acad, des Inscript. . . Comptes rendus, n, لآ.

ABEL : Le Tombeau (TJsa’ie
l’ensevelissement d’Isaie sous le chêne de Rogel garde une saveur
plus archaïque. On serait donc autorise à croire qu’il y eut, à une
certaine époque, aux environs de Siloe, un vieil arbre qui marquait
aux yeux des populations le lieu de la déposition d’^sa'ie et peut-être
aussi de son martyre. Nous n’essaierons pas d’établir si des rapports
existent entre la légende du cèdre et celle du chêne de Rogel. Il
est plus facile de constater que la mention de Rogel ou du «Foulon»
a pu être inspirée par le fait de la rencontre d’Achaz et du nabi
vers «1’extrémité de l’aqueduc de 1’étang supérieur, sur le chemin du
champ du Foulon», Is. 7 3. L’équivalence de ٥5١3 employé ici et de
5١ي a été reconnue par le targum de Jonathan et les versions syriaque
et arabe, qui les rendent par le même terme: جإلإمخ A- noter pourtant
le cas de Josue 15 7, ou l’Arabe substitue à *ain Rogel l’identification
très nette de 'ain Ayoub, et la paraphrase non moins intéressante
d’Isaie 7 3, dans le targum: «sur le chemin du champ de l’étendage
des Foulons» 5>pn٠ Ce champ où les blanchisseurs
étendaient leur, lessive au soleil se localise aisément entre les piscines
de Siloé et le bïr Ayoub. Un cliemin sortant de la ville ancienne
par une issue méridionale et se dirigeant vers ’ain Rogel, apres avoir
passe à proximité de la bouche de l’aqueduc de Siloé qui précéda
le tunnel d’Ézéchîas serait fort bien en situation pour représenter le
chemin du champ du Foulon.
La notice des Vies des Prophètes concorde pleinement avec ce
point de vue, le chêne de Rogel, ainsi appelé sans doute en raison
de sa situation sur le chemin qui mène à la source d& ce nom, était
plante ٩o٨t€pa 8 ؟لآاًta/3d(T€(j)s لناًV رارناًاً0ةلأ, œv aircoXecrev E eKt'aç ة /?ao٦Àeuç
aura, «près du passage des eaux que le roi Ézéchias avait fait dis-
paraître en les comblant». Le terme 8id/3a(ns que nous traduisons
par «passage» ne signifie ni un canal, ni un aqueduc, ni un cours
d’eau quelconque. C’est le terme consaci’é pour indiquer l’endroit
où l’on passe un fieuve, où l'on franchit un cours d’eau, de préférence
un gué. Aussi bien le texte rapporte-t-il l’obstruction opérée par
Ezéchias aux eaux et non au passage (SufrLs). Le point le plus
évident où l’on passait l’ancien canal qui amenait les eaux de la
piscine supérieure du Gihon ( Oumm ed-Daradj) à la piscine inférieure
que représente aujourd’hui le birket el-Hamra, se trouvait à son issue
du rocher, un peu avant l’endroit où il se déversait dans ce dernier
bassin. A 1’époque de la rédaction des Vies, un sentiei’ venant.

30 Journal of tlie Palestine Oriental Society
comme de nos jours, de la vallée du Tyropoeon coupait l’antique
aqueduc de Siloé vers son extrémité sud-ouest avant de gagner le
terrain plat avoisinant le bîr Ayoub.
L’ensemble de ces indications aboutit à localiser le chêne de
Rogel vers la pointe sud de la colline dite d’Ophel {ed-Déhourcth)^
aux abords du birket él-Hamra. Il est assez probable, d’après
l’Onomasticon d’Eusèbe et de S. Jérôme,1 qu’aux temps byzantins
et peut-être déjà auparavant, ce birkéh ait porté le nom de piscine
du Foulon — ٠٧ KoXv/jLp^Opa rov Kva de son utilisation par les blanchisseurs du temps, utilisation claire-
ment attestée pour le Moyen âge. «De cele aigue, tanoit l’on les
cuirs de la cité. Et si en lavoit Ton les dras etc.»2 Mais ceci,
n’infirmant en rien !,identification de 'aïn Rogel avec le bîr Ayoub,
montre que le domaine de Rogel ou du Foulon avait alors pris une
extension qu’il n’avait pas à l’origine.
Le second mode de sépulture enregistré par la notice (2) revient
à l’érection d’un monument commémoratif vers les eaux de Siloé.
Ce terme s’appliquant strictement, à l’origine, à l’aqueduc creusé à
flanc de coteau était lui aussi devenu d’une compréhension plus vaste,
jusqu’à désigner les piscines pratiquées dans le creux du Tyropoeon
et l’issue même du canal souterrain d’.Ézéchias. Quoi qu’il en soit,
ce tombeau qui présentait en quelque sorte Isa’ie comme le génie
tutélaire de la source n’était pas éloigné de l’arbre sacré de Rogel.
Les deux traditions ont-elles coexisté ou se sont-elles succédées? Il
est difficile de se prononcer à ce sujet. Il fut un te٠mps où la
sépulture d’Abraham était cherchée soit sous le Térébinthe de Mambré
soit à la grotte de Macpéla. Le tombeau dit d’Isaïe, participant
aux embellissements que provoqua sous Hérode la renaissance du
culte des tombes ancestrales, dut prendre à cette époque un regain
de notoriété, époque où les sépulcres des patriarches à Hébron
étaient rehaussés d’une merveilleuse enceinte, et où le tombeau de
David recevait une somptueuse entrée de marbre blanc.3
1 Klostermann, Onomasticon, p. 39, 165.
2 Contin. de Guillaume de rlÙ¦yr dite du ms. de Rotlielin, Rec. des Hist. des
Croisades, Occid., II, p. 510.
3 JosÈphe, Antiquités . . . XVI, 7, 1; Guerre . . . IV, 9, 7.

ABEL: Le Tombeau d’Isa'íe
Ce tombeau de David et de sa lignée sert à l’auteur des Vies des
Prophètes de point de repère pour la localisation du sépulcre d’Isaie.
Il s’agit à n’en pas douter de l’hypogée royal mentionné fréquemment
par les livres des Bois et des Chroniques, hypogée qui se développa
selon les besoins, car il est fait parfois allusion au sépulcre que tel
prince s’était préparé, hypogée situé dans la cité de David, dans la
partie méridionale, ainsi qu’il ressort de Néhémie 3 16. Si plusieurs
rois ne sont pas déposés dans la sépulture da٦٢idique, aucun n’est
exclu de la cité. Leurs tombeaux ne s’éloignent pas d’ailleurs de
ceux de David et de Salomon. Osias est enseveli dans le champ de la
sépulture des rois. Ezéchias trouve sa dernière demeure à la montée
des tombeaux des fils de David. Par un privilège accordé l’excellence
de sa conduite, on admit le grand-prêtre Jo’iada، à partager la
sépulture des rois dans la cité de David. D’après les Vies des
Prophètes, le prêtre Zacharie, tué sur l’ordre de Joas, aurait été
enterré avec son père.
Notre document connait aussi un tombeau des prêtres près duquel
il situe les sépultures d’Aggée, du prophète Zacharie et d’Isaie.* 1
Pour ce dernier, la position est plus détaillée. Il se trouve au midi
du tombeau des prêtres, à côté du tombeau des rois. On déduira
donc de ces divers renseignements l’existence d’une antique nécropole
dans la partie sud de la colline, dont les divers hypogées étaient
réservés aux grands personnages de la cité, princes, grands-prêtres,
prophètes. Les discussions postérieures entre docteurs sur la pureté
lévitique de Jérusalem ne font que confirmer cette conclusion.2
Lorsque l’interdiction de toute sépulture à l’intérieur des murs mise
en vigueur surtout à partir d’Esdras fut considérée comme une loi
antique, il ne vint jamais à l’esprit d’aucun rabbi de nier que des
tombeaux illustres se trouvassent dans la ville. Il était laissé à leur
ingéniosité de casuistes de donner à cette anomalie une explication
plausible. De plus, quand vint l’époque où l’on se crut obligé d’enlever
lés sépultures situées dans les murs, certains tombeaux échappèrent
à l’ostracisme dont les puritains voulaient frapper sans distinction
toutes les demeures des morts.
1 Sch MANN, op. cp. 68, 70, 76.
1 ٢٠î.K٦e١٠ll١ La Cite de La id, تآة*. Les tibes royales dans la Cite de
David, p. 35 SS.

32 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
Parmi les prohibitions des causes d’impureté légale qu’énuméré la١
Tossefta à propos de Jérusalem nous lisons ceci: «A Jérusalem on
ne laisse pas les morts passer la nuit؛ on n’y place pas d’ossements:
on n’y laisse pas de tombeau, à l’exception des tombeaux de la
maisou de David et du tombeau de la pi’opbétesse Houlda, qui y
étaient depuis les jours des premiers prophètes.»؛ L’exception devient,
plus generale avec cette baratta: «Tous les tombeaux (à l’intérieur
de la ville) doivent être- enlevés, sauf le tombeau d’un roi ou celui
du prophète.» Houlda n’était donc pas la seule entre les prophètes
à jouir de ce privilège, comme le manifestent également les Abot de
B. Nathan qui présentent sous cette forme la cinquième prollibition
du traité Negatm: ((On ne doit pas à Jérusalem laisser de moi’ts
pendant une nuit, à l’exception du tombeau des rois de la maison
de David, du tombeau dTsa'ie et de celui de Houlda.»2 L’intérêt de
ce texte est de s’accorder avec la notice des Vies des Prophètes sur
la position generale du tombeau dTsa'ie.
La relation de ces hypogées avec la canalisation souterraine de
l’Ophel est aussi un point sur تم lequel ce document s’allie avec la
littérature rabbinique. Une dizaine d’années avant la destruction
du temple par Titus, on aurait-procédé à l’enlèvement des sépultures
de la ville exigé par les Schammâites. Quand on chercha plus tai’d
le motif qui avait préserve de cette mesure les tombeaux des rois et
des prophètes, la présence de conduits souterrains dans la meme
région servit à justifier cette dérogation à la loi commune. -On
supposa, sans se préoccuper de leur véritable destination, qu'ils
étaient des exutoires des l’impureté que dégageaient les tombeaux.
«On dit qu’il y avait la une caverne qui entraînait l’impureté dans
la vallée du Cédron.)>3 R. Aquiba avait parlé d’un canal remplissant
le meme office. La notice grecque sur Isa'ie place son tombeau à
proximité du canal de Siloé; de plus, elle fait allusion, sous une
forme légendaire, au dédale qui formait 1’accès du tombeau des rois
et aux cachettes annexes ou Ézéchias eut l’impru'dence d’introduire
les envoyés du roi de Babylone. 2 Rois 20 12-19. Le fin du récit (3)
1 Tr. Negaïm, VI, 2.
١ئلآعكآع٢ة٦ذلآ لآج٦٦لآة٦لآ ج La pureté létique (le Jérusalem, Ber. des études âuwes,
LXII (1911), p. 20'3. On trouvera dans cet article un bon développement sur la
question relative au maintien de ces tombeaux.
3 Buchler, p. 209, 210.

ABEL : Le Tombeau d’Isa'íe
suppose en effet que le trésor se trouvait dans l’hypogée royal, car
le conteur reproche à ce propos au roi d’avoir profané les restes de
David et de Salomon. Hyrçan et Hérode, d’après Josèphe (Antiq.,
XVI, 7 1) se seraient livré à des opérations analogues au tombeau
de David pour en ravir des richesses.
Isaïe étant représenté comme le génie tutélaire de la source, on
serait tenté de chercher son monument à la sortie du tunnel
d’Ézéchias, là où les colons d’Aelia élevèrent plus tard un édicule à
la Fortune (au Gad-Yavan) auquel fut substituée, au 5e siècle, l’église
de Siloé. Mais les indications de notre notice font obstacle à cette
supposition. Les eaux de Siloé représentent avant tout le conduit
antique dont l’histoire d’Isàie fait mention, et que l’on a retrouvé
sur le flanc de la colline ed-Dehoivrah parallèle au Cédron. Il serait
donc plus juste de placer le tombea.u du grand prophète a proximité
de ce canal que de le mettre en relation avec -le canal d’Ézéchias.
Sa situation se précise davantage grâce au voisinage des tombes
royales dont une partie a été mise à découvert par les fouilles de
M. R. Weill. Mais l’étendue du «champ des tombeaux des fils de
David» n’est pas encore connue, pas plus que les secrètes retraites
de la nécropole primitive. D’immenses travaux sont encore nécessaires
pour arracher à la vénérable colline de l’antique Sion tous ses
mystères. Nous espérons que le jour où l’on reprendra des fouilles
qui dénuderont le rocher entre le champ exploré par le capitaine
Weill et la pointe sud de la colline, le tombeau d’Isàie, ou ce qu’il
en reste, verra de nouveau la lumière, après de longs siècles
d’obscurité et d’oubli.

NE of the most interesting and important branches of Arab
folklore is Bedouin laÙ¦v. As the subject is so wide, I have
chosen for this paper only one phase of it: ،،Judicial Courts among
the Bedouin,”1 and have postponed consideration of the remaining
phases: qanun ed-diyafah, or regulation of hospitality; qanun ej-jaza,
the murder code; qanun el-ard (class, ‘ird), the code of rape; and
• qanun el-lntquq, the civil code.
A legal system was in force among the Arabs long before Islam;
the names of some well-known lawyers have been preserved—Aktam
ibn Saifi,2 Hajib ibn Zirarah,3 ØŒAmir ibn ez-Zarb,4 ØŒAbd el-Muttalib
al٠Qurasi.٥ Female la١vyers were also known—Hind bint el٠HassahG
1 [rfhe Ù¦vriter of this paper is a young Muslim gentleman, son of ohe of the
most prominent sheikhs of southern Palestine. From boyhood he has been
intimately acquainted with the customs and practises of the Fellahin and Bedouin,
between whom in southern Palestine there is little distinction, one class gradually
merging into the other. He has been collecting folkloristic and ethnographic
materials for thirteen years, noting them doÙ¦vn in special diaries and notebooks,
a number of which unfortunately fell into the hands of the enemy during the
war, and were destroyed. Our knowledge of the history, languages, and customs
of southern Palestine will gain greatly from the intensive knowledge, and large
collections which He has gathered; this, we hope, is only the first instalment (W. F. A.)]
I wish to express my appreciation to Dr. W. F. Albright and Dr. T. Canaan for
encouragement and help given in the preparation of this paper.
2 Of the tribe Beni Tamim, between Yemameh and Ihsa. He died soon after
the coming of the Prophet.
3 Contemporary and fellow-tribesman of the former.
4 Ditto.
s Of the Qureis, the Prophet’s grandfather.
Ù¥ Daughter of the Emir el-Hassah of the Beni Tamim.

EL-BARGHUTIII: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine 35
and JumØŒah bint Habis.1 Ù¦Vith the spread of Islam these laws and
regulations Ù¦vere influenced and more or less modified by the laws
of the new religion. It was, and still is, customary that whenever
two individuals or two tribes differ on something they consent to
refer the matter to a judge, who settles the dispute according to
hereditary laws. These laws suit the Arabs better than any others,
since they accord Ù¦vith their psychological state, their customs and
manner of living.
These judicial principles also guide legal procedure among the Ù 
peasants of Palestine, Ù¦vith differences which will always be noted.
The inhabitants of our country are at present divided into two
political parties—Qaisi and Yemeni. Both parties have judges to
aid in the solution of hard problems and the settlement of disputes.
There is no objection offered if one party brings the case to the
judges of the other party, for the judges must never be partial, nor
do they fail to search for the truth and deal with justice. Nor is
the case different when a Qaisi and a Yemeni who have a dispute
come to a judge who belongs to one of the factions. The judge does
only what he thinks right, as he is afraid of the majalis ed-daha,
i. e. of the talk which takes place in the mad dfah2 before noon
(morning gossip).3
The right to judge belongs only to certain families, such as el-
Manasira among the Beni NuØŒeim,4 Abu ØŒIram in Yattah,5 elÙ Mahamideh
in ec؟٦amu،,6 the Dar ،[Jreiqat in el-Wadiyeh,7 and el-،Arrabi in
Qabatiyeh,8 etc. No other families are supposed to mete out justice,
and the administration of justice is thus hereditary. The father
1 Daughter of a renowned warrior of the Beni Tamim.
2 The madafah is a room for the common use of the villagers, where guests
are entertained and lodged. The custom of the madafah exists in nearly every
village south of Nablus, and among the Beni Saib on the coast of the sea. North,
of Nablus we find, instead of madafat, daiua/win, or visitors’ rooms in the house
of every notable. The elders of the village spend much of their time in the
3 The gossip of the elders and loungers in the madafah, while the others
are at work.
4 In the Hebron district (Jebel el-Halil).
Ù r> Ditto.
6 Ditto.
7 El-Wadiyeh is the district to the east and southeast of Jerusalem.
8 In the district of Jenin.

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
drills his brightest and cleverest son, or an uncle trains his nephew,
allowing him to attend his court until he becomes acquainted with
all types of cases, after which he may be permitted to judge and
settle easy cases under the former’s supervision. "When he gets
sufficient practise, and is trusted by the people, difficult cases will
be referred to him, and gradually he gains the entire confidence of
the villagers.1
There may be one judge or more in a family. The oldest is
most respected, and if several are of the same age the richest and
noblest is the most acceptable. In case they are equal in wealth
and nobility, the judge is chosen whose father was a better judge
than the other judge’s father. It is still true at present that the
judges belong to the noblest families of the district.2 These judges
have ample jurisdiction, and are not bound to govern their decision
by any written code which fixes a maximum or minimum penalty.
Their most important duty is to know the rank of different families.
A murder, violation of female honour, or of the right of a noble and
powerful family weigh more heavily than a murder, rape, etc., of
other families. A hamuleh (family) in which many females have
been violated or many members killed is despised and regarded as
weak and dishonourable, being therefore placed on a lower level than
other families.3 The judges have full authority to increase or reduce
a penalty, always taking into consideration the common welfare and
the personal influence of both parties. Sometimes they punish a crime
with half, at other times the same crime with a third, and still on
other occasions the same crime is punished with more than a diyeh
1 Following are the names of the present judges from these families, all peasants:
٦Jajj Hosein and ‘Isa Mohammed from el-Manasirah; Shadeh of Abu ،Iram; ،Abd
er-Rahim Taljeh of elÙ Mahamideh; and Hasan Abu Mharib from Deir Jrir. The
names of Bedouin and semi-Bedouin judges will be given below.
2 The Prophet ordered that the noblest of the people should settle cases
arising in his people. A liadit warns against the danger of entrusting a post to
an inefficient person.
3 Proverbs alluding to this point of view are: “Cheap blood and broken
honour” (damm rhis u-lard rsisy “This family neither takes revenge nor removes
disgrace” (hal-'eleh la btohid-et-tar wala btinfi el-'dr). The repeated violation of
female honour is alluded to with the phrase “Olives crushed before they are

EL-BARG-HUTHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine 37
and gurrah.1 The judge must know the social position of the offenders
and their families exactly. Minute knowledge of all these important
details differs among judges, since some are cleverer than others,
have had more experience, and are more accustomed to intricate
cases. Sometimes a judge cannot decide a case, because it is too
complicated. In this event he sends somebody secretly to reconcile
the parties.2 3 If he does not succeed, he postpones his decision until
he discovers the right one with the help of some other judge who
must proffer his advice.
The number of judges nowadays is decreasing, and there are none
at all in northern Palestine. The، Bedouin and the semi-nomadic
tribes are most conservative; the closer we approach cities the more
seldom are real judges found, while the people patronize the official
government courts increasingly.
Judges are paid for investigating and settling cases. The payment
in criminal cases is called rizqah,¿ while in property and other un-
important cases it is called jiHah. The payment is determined
according to the importance of each case: that of a murder or
violation is 100 Turkish mejidis; that of an unpremeditated murder
or the injury of an important organ 50 mejidis; in the case of theft
or other minor crimes 10 mejidis. There is also a fee, called bislah,
paid to judges of the religious law (Serftdli), who are sometimes called
on to decide questions. This sum, which varies between ten and a
hundred mejidis, is generally estimated by the collaboration of the
parties involved and the judge.4 There are four different kinds of
payment: —
1. Rizqat mubtil, the fine which is paid by the accused, that is,
if Zeid and ØŒAmr quarrel, and the latter wins the case, the former
pays the fine.
1 The diyeh is the blood-money, price of blood, weregeld. The gurrah is a
girl taken from the party of the murderer and married to a man of the family
which lost the victim. This girl is married without a bridal price or mahr
(rendered „dowry”).
2 The phrase for “(the judge) reconciled them” is itayyib *aleihum in the case
of murder or rape, and otherwise isalihhum.
3 The custom of the rizqah (rihan) is very old; cf. the story of Alqamat
el-Fahl and ØŒAmir ibn et-Tufeil in Risdlat ibn Zeidun.
4 If the judge prefers, he may take sheep or cloth, etc., instead of money.
The payment is then called ma*artel.

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
2. Riz¡at mujrim, the fine which is paid by the criminals.
3. Rizqat mundsafah, a settlement by compromise, each party
paying half. This payment occurs when the case is evenly balanced,
and open to suspicion, each party claiming more than is due. This
payment is also known in canon law.
4. Rizqat mivntasir, given by the party which has gained the
victory, or by the accused person who has been absolved of guilt.
Before the case is taken up, it is decided which sort of rizqah is
to be paid, and by whom. As soon as both parties have agreed with
the judge upon one of these modes of payment, the case takes its
regular course. As it is naturally still doubtful which side will win
the case, the parties do not pay anything at first, but offer the
judges security, such as a mare’s bridle, a pipe, a ring, a tobacco
case or bag. Though in themselves very insignificant objects, they
signify that the litigating parties have pledged their honour. If one
fails to pay his fine, he cannot redeem his pledge, and is very much
despised.1 After the decision has been made, the judge keeps the
pledge of the person who is to make the payment, and the latter
must not leave the assembly room (maddfali) until he pays his debt/2
The pledge is returned to the other party at once. It happens but
rarely that a house or rifle is given as a pledge. The judge is not
ashamed to ask for his fee, and the people see that it is paid. If
any difficulty arises, the family of the accused person compels him
to do his duty.
Judges are divided into four classes: (1) Quddt ed-dyuf, judges
of guests; (2) quddt es-sulh, or civil magistrates; (3) quddt ed-damm,
judges of blood; (4) quddt es-self, judges of the sword. The last two
are the most important and the most powerful. The quddt ed-darmn
are divided into three categories:
1 The custom of pledging is very old, and we find it as Tar back as in the
time of the Jahiliyeh (before Islam); cf. the story of Hajib ibn Zirarah and
Kisra (Chosroes II.) in lIqd ul-Farid (by Ibn ØŒAbd Rabbuh), Vol. I, p. 130.
2 Nearly every maddfah has its care-taker, or natur (lit. watchman), who is
selected by the elders. In some places he is paid a stipend, up to a hundred
mejidis a year, while in other villages he receives up to a hundred ؟؛&، of wheat
(the .؟a، is 3—6 ratls, or 9—18 kg.), varying in different places. He makes the
coffee, gathers the wood, keeps the guest-house clean and in order, sees that all
the guests have bedding, provided by the rich inhabitants of the village. In
some places he is employed to carry letters to other villages. rThe ndtur receives
a portion of the food offered to the guests.

EL-BARG-HUTHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine
1. El-mabatit (sing, mabtut), 1 the courts of first instance. E Tall
of ez-iahiriyeh is a judge of this type.
2. El-mandZid (sing, mansad),2 3 the courts of appeal. El-Mahm ideh
of es-Samfi‘ is a judge -of this court. When one appeals to this
court, one. says to one’s opponent, 1aleik bil-mansaA.
3. El-mandqi، (plur. of manqa‘),3 the courts of cassation, of final
appeal. Their decisions are final. Dar Taljeh represents this court.
These three courts settle blood questions alone. Cases of violation
are brought to tlie court of honour Card) of the Beni ‘Uqbah. Any
case of murder may be brought dil’ectly to any of these courts,
without going first to the lower ones or ones, but one may agree
from the beginning to go through the three courts.
The judges of guests have no official power, and in each village
tliere is only one, generally a popular person 01’ a notable. If a
’guest arrives in a village the villagers contend for the right and
honoui’ of banqueting him. Even women may take part in this
Villages may be divided into two categories witli respect to their
mode of showing liospitality to the guest:-
1. Villages wliere the terms of offering meals to guests are settled
in advance.
2. Villages where the people dispute as mentioned above for tlie
honour of pi’eparing a meal for guests. There are four qwds (bows)
each formed by a stick with a string tied to botli ends of it. On the
thr.eads are strung slips of' paper, each bearing the name'of a villager.
The villagers are divided into four categories: (a) the rich, who must
provide a good meal for noble visitors, the meal consisting of a
sheep and the accessories’, (b) those whose means will not permit of
their offering more than a fowlØ› (c) those who prepare the meal
fi’om food always ready at home, such as cheese, olives, eggs, butter,
leben, etc.’, (d) the poorest, who bring only barley for the animals
belonging to the guests. These four classes are called,'respectively,
dor Ihr, dor zgor, dor rtl r, dor ،mabcdelr (ف! آدآدلآلعلآ ت٦ .(وها٦٦اأ٩٦٦
arrive together, one of the dor el-kbir must feed them.
1 Lit. ،،the chosen one/
2 Lit. “the place of oath,” from nasad, “take oath.”
3 Lit. “the place of stagnation,” i. e. ٦vhere the course of justice stops.

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
The judge to whom authority is giveu anuounces his decision ill
favor of a person belonging to one of these classes, always acting
according to the following rules:--
1. A companion of the guest in his journey (rafiq ei-tariq) has
the fil’st right to provide the meal (¿۵ bitqdda wala bithakam).
2. A guest of high rank is entertained by a person of his rank.
3. A well-to-do pei’son is frequently selected to entertain the guest,
since the poor cannot afford the expenditure.Ø›
If there are two men who wish to have the same guest, one
strengthens his case by saying that he has not given a meal for a
long time, while the other did so only recently. In such ai’guments
the following expressions are used: ma sabaq li tniyehÙˆ "I have never
entertained a guest اً” tniyeto liaclra, “liis banquet is green (fresh)"',
xuexs tqul bxl ،xjx xltx ٦اةة-لا)٦ ecl-dyuj ٩١٠xstlu, داًة ذللأأ١١اب F R لألم أداً
'rich man who is eager to entertain guests”; Allah yihayyi ecl-dyuf
،a-qadar ma da amn e٦-l٦ext xt-daiaq e٦-b٦ixl x٧-a١xa e٩١-٦xau،ud Jxlxum
min zamanو “may God greet the guests in proportion as their horses
liave trotted and as the miser is abashed, I promised to entertain
them long ago.” A longer formula is: toeis tqulو 'uAaini tirl 2 3 4 5 6ahum
mxn xxxahunx la-maljahxtm) u-lxaij/ye xi-Ù¦wÙ x|Ù©je Uxtal wx-
Ihahum; xt-liaxrye qadx aVanx-ijahuux،)“ X ana eUnxsYHXH d-uxuqdxr =
“What do you say, my eye watched the guests from their starting point
to their rendezvous. Welcome to the guests, welcome to your beard
and to their beard; 3 welcome to the judge who has given them to me—
I am the one who i.s allowed to entertain them.” This custona is
gradually dying out, and at present it is practised only among the
Bedouin of Gaza and the vicinity, among the Beni Hasan,* Beni
s&lim,5 and in the Hebron and Jerusalem G districts, especially where
there is close contact with the Bedouin.
1 In such a case the rich man may say, ،،My intestines are stronger than his
bones” (masarint aqwa min lizamuh\ i. e. my resources are greater than his.
2 ØŸThe fellahin use afani qt antdni instead of a'tani.
3 Among the Arabs, the beard or mustache is the symbol of a man’s honour.
Since the beard is so important it is never shaved, and it is counted a disgrace
to have it shaved.
4 The Beni Hasan live in the villages Bittir, Walajah, Malhah, Beit Jala, etc.
5 In the villages Tayyibeh, Deir Jrir, Kufr Malik and Kammun.
6 This term is here used to include the Jebel el-Quds, i. e. the villages about
Jerusalem, as far as Bireh, toward the north.

EL-BARGHUTHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin ot' Palestine 41
The justices of the peace are chosen from among the notables
of the villages and their chiefs. When they hear of a struggle in a
village, they go at once to the place, and stop the quarrel by
separating the contending parties. After this they stand around the
grave of the slain man. If the victim is of a‘ good family, the man
who demands his blood, the wcdiy ed-damm or blood avenger, or
perhaps the notable of the family stands at the upper end of the
grave. He usually takes a handful of dust, and strews it, saying
“Bear witness, 0 angels of heaven and earth, that I have sprinkled
my blood on these present, and they are more worthy than I to
ةل٩ لاار٦€ل)ع٩ع أ ١يعلاًهآهآاةد٢د٧ذ١ ةاآلآلل٦هة Utala’xkt es-sita tuaUrd زس
natart davnnvb ،(لة٣خ٦)ةا١ر٦-طل it-Irum aliictqq minm bi-tdub it-tar).
The audience then encourages the bloodavenger, and addressing the
victim, says: “You liave only to sleep, but we must act (ente ،cdeik
mom tveljna ØŒaleina el-qdm).2 The bystanders help the family of
the victim to wreak vengeance upon the murderer 01’ to secure its
blood-money. After this bi’ief prelude to their tedious and difficult
task all leave the cemetery and pi'oceed to the village, where they
forbid the relatives of the victim to attack the house of the murderer.
Tlie judge 01’ judges consider the case and its importance, and try
.to make a settlement. If unsuccessful, they try to bring about a
primary ai’mistice, ‘attvat elrftuh,3 lasting from a few days to several
months. Sometimes the accusei’s refuse to accept the armistice as
arranged by the justices of the peace. In this case a judge of' blood
is brought immediately, and he ari’anges an armistice, as will be
desci’ibed below. An armistice made thi’ough the judges of the peace
is thus less effective than one ordered by the judges of blood, wlio
are much more important than those of the former category. They
enjoy the full confidence of the p.eople, who acknowledge the justice
and fairness of' their decisions, and, therefore respect them and fear
their decisions. ,
Owing to the spread of modei’n law the number o'f these judges
has decreased, as observed above. Among the judges of blood from
ا The strewing of' dust represents the sprinkling of blood. All thos.e upon whom
the dust falls have the right and obligation to take vengeance for the victim.
2 Cf. Uadd^d, “Die Blutrache in Palastina,” z. D. p. V., 1917 (T. c.).
3 Sometimes a short armistice of four days is given, called 1atwat ham u lammt
“a truce of some days (]{.am yom) for collecting (money).”

42 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
th Bedouin and the semi-nomadic tribes may be mentioned: Hajjaj
abu-Fld, of the ti’ibe of Huteim, whose family may be traced back
to Bahilah) to which belonged also Quteibah ibn-Muslim, the great
general of ‘Abd elMalik ibn-Marwan and his son el-Walid; and
Mohammed iz-Zir of et-Taamr h.
The judges of the sword, or arbitrators act as a kind of court
martial. Among these judges are Abu 00s,Ù¤ el-Baragte,^ ej-Jayusi
and Dar Jarrar.* 2 3 4 * 6 They are not real judges not act accoi’ding
to Bedouin law. If a dispute 01’ conflict arises in theii’ disti’ict, they
go to the parties 01’ send foi’ them and decide on the ground of
purely political considerations, regardless of justice. Hence they are
disliked by the people, wlio try their'best to be judged by the judges
of blood, in 01’der to make sure that tlie criminal is punished. The
arbitrators impose a fine, fi’om wliicl'i they take their share. Frequently
they take with them a man learned in Muslim law (ØŒaZwz), who would
follow the principles of sarifah law in making-his decision, which the
arbitrators then carry into execution. When the assembly meets,
the “judge of the sword” says: “Here is pai’adise [pointing to the
‘alim] and liere is hellfire [pointing to himself] and here is the sword
[pointing again to himself] and here is the holy Book [el-mushaf,
pointing for tlie second time to the learned man],” in other words,
“By whom do you wish to be judged, by me or by tlie sarVak5 For
the last two generations these arbitrators have practically ceased
to exist.
Having dealt fully with the judges, let US describe the introductory
procedure in a case, and then outline the process in court. If no
legal steps are taken, the murderer or ravisher must die. In that
event there is no way to come to terms, and hostilities will continue.
The sahib ed-damm and the talib lil-‘ardQ are very bold and haye the
right to slay their opponents whenever and wherever they meet them,
and are not held responsible for their act. Accordingly the relatives
Ø› From Qaryet elÙ  nab (Beni Malik).
2 From Deir gassaneh (Beni Zeid).
3 From Kur (Beni Saib).
4 From Sanur (Masariq elÙ Jarrar)..
& He thus ascribes the religious prerogatives to the learned man and the
secular power to himself.
6 Respectively “the owner of blood,” i. e. the nearest l’elative of the victim,
and “the one who demands lionour” (in rape cases).

EL-BARGHUTHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of' Palestine 43
of the murderer try their best to obtain an armistice —
elrftuh 1—as mentioned above? The murderer pays 100 mejidis2 for
the privilege of an armistice, and this money is not deducted later
from the blood-money or diyeh, After the lapse of the first armistice,
50 or 70 mejidis are paid for a second one—‘atwat el-qbul 3—and
this amount is deducted from the blood-money. If a third or f'ourth
armistice is given, nothing is paid for them.4 The armistices may
even be prolonged for years until peace is declared, but the latter
never happens without the preliminary armistice. The relatives of
tlie victim wait for an opportunity to avenge themselves, but are
hindered by the ai’mistice from carrying.out their purpose. If a
murder has been committed unintentionally, the fine paid' for the.
armistices does not exceed half the sum mentioned for cases of
premeditated murder or violation. When a member of a family is
accused of a crime, and his family is unable to oppose tlie accusers,
it takes refuge (yitnibu) with a powerful notable (mtannib)5 who is
able to protect them, and the latter begins negotiation for peace.
The family of the accused person may even be obliged to shift all
its moveable propei’ty to some other place, where it is safer, since
nothing stolen during the first three and a half days after tlie murder
is deducted from the blood-money. In case the guilty man and his
family are equal in position and honour to their opponents, they send
for people respected by the accusers. The latter respond to the call,
and begin the difficult task of making an armistice. During the
armistice, the irritated spirits are calmed, and better relations may
arise between the parties. The mediators compel.the guilty party
to pay whatever fine the, judge imposes.
1 The word futuh, from fatah, ،،to open,” refers to the ،،opening” of negotia-
tions for the truce. I have never heard the expression 1 2 * * * 6atwat el-faurah, quoted
by Haddad, loc. cit.
2 A Turkish mejidi, or a fifth of a Turkish pound, is twenty piastres say, or
about 4 Ù§4 francs.
9 The term qubul, ،،acceptance,” is employed because the acceptance of a
second truce smoothes the way to a final agreement.
7 In some places, money is paid for every truce, even for the fourth, fifth, etc.
6 The word tunb (tunub) means ،،tent-peg”; tannaba (tanaba) is “pitch a tent
beside another” (become a neighbour). Ana tanib 1aleik means ،،I wish you to
accept me as a neighbour,” i. e., as a client.

44 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
The family of the accused and its relations as far as the fifth
degree ا may he obliged to emigrate from the village. Those who
desire to remain in their homes must pay a fine of 30—100 mejidis
(tis£at en-nom 2) and several pieces of cloth to the family of the
plaintiff. They are not safe fi’om vengeance until this is done. This
sum of money is not reckoned in the diyeh unless the one who pays
it is a distant relation (beyond the fifth degree).
The advantages of tlie armistice are: it prevents the continuation
of hostilitiesØ› its acceptance is a partial confession on the part of
the accused personØ› as time elapses the bitterness over the crime
disappears. The conditions are foi’mulated by an agreement of the
two parties. Among these conditions are: the murderer may not
enter the village where the relatives of the victim dwellØ› he may not
approach a fountain which is frequented by the other party. Some-
times the, plaintiffs ask only that he shall not enter their quarters.
After the agreement the murderer is free to go wherever lie desiresØ›
aside from the places specified. If he abides by the agreement he
is not subject to molestation by the othei’ party.
The armistice is not formed until the judges have appointed a
man to act as guarantor for the accusers. The judge asks tlie
guarantor: “Do you guarantee that they [the accusers] will not
trespass against the defendants nor perform any evil action, but that
they will live with the accused as peacefully as the clothes line,3
that they will load a camel together and draw water together in
peace from the cistern?"4 The man 01’ men who act as guarantors
ask the accusers: “Do you accept US as guai’antors against treachery,
bl’each of promise, injury to youi’ enemies, and change of your mind
[violation of the armistice]?”ن If they answer in the affirmative, an
armistice is made in the village of the victim. The guarantors who
are thus appointed must be of higher rank than those whom they
guarantee, and are usually selected by the defendants or by the
judges. The accusers reserve the right to reject these persons—if.
1 Lit. “fifth grandfather” (jidd).
2 Lit. “the nine of sleep” i. e. security, assurance (cf. Haddad, Z. D. P. V.).
3 Clothes-lines hang beside one another in perfect harmony.
4 Ar. ibtikfal innhum la ya‘du wald yabdu, mitl hbdl el-gasil, isilu l 2 3 4 5ala blir
u-yiridulala bir?
5 Ar. hal qbilium ivjuhna min el-hon u-l-boq u-l-^atal u-l-batdl?

EL-BARGHUTHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine 45
for example, they are their enemies. The choice of the wujuh may
take place in their absence. Even an amir may stand security for
a noble or notables. HoÙ¦vever irritating the circumstances may be,
the accusers cannot break the rules of the armistice and attack their
enemies. They try to rid themselves of the wujuh by asking the
guarantor to remove his ivijli. If he accepts they are free to do
what they like. The expression ‘adahurn el-lom1 is used of the
accusers in such a case. If he does not accept they must keep the
armistice peacefully until its expiration, but then they may refuse to
renew it. If the plaintiffs break the armistice, the guarantor has
the right to kill the offenders if he meets them during the first three
and a third days. In case he does not meet them, he places them
under trial.2
The rights of guarantee are greater than those of blood, since a
greater number of persons is affected. They are championed not
only by the guarantors, but also by the witnessing bystanders in
general. If the person who has broken the rules of el-hidneh â– 3 4 refuses
to appear before the judge, the latter summons him himself. If he
still refuses, his life and property are forfeit to those whom he has
dishonoured by the violation of the armistice, nor has he any right
whatever to demand damages for what has happened. He is left
without a diyeli and without a ivajaha (see below), bild ‘awad wala
qawad,* i. e., ،،without exchange and without a sheep.” The guarantor
must pay compensation for whatever loss or damage the peaceful
party may have incurred from the treachery of the other party, so
that it may not be said: ،،The one who takes refuge in the guarantee
of A is like the one who takes refuge (lit. covers himself) with a
cloud” (el-mitgatti bi-wijh flan mitl el-mitgatti bis-shab).5 Owing to
the extreme severity of the punishment which is meted out to the
treacherous violator of the armistice, and to the dishonour which
follows, it is very rare.
1 Lit. ،،They have no blame,” i. e. they are not to be blamed for what they
do, since the wijh has withdrawn.
2 Of such breakers of the truce it is said, tdhu bi-l-wijh, “They violated the
3 Hidneh is the ordinary Arabic term for Fellah 1ativdh.
4 The ١vord qaivad means lit. “an animal led with a rope,” i. e. a goat or a sheep.
5 Another saying is : el-mithazzim buh ‘aryan, “The one who covers himself
with him is naked.”

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
When the trial of a case has been postponed for a sufficient time
to allow the excitement to quiet down, the parties come to an
agreement, and select the judges. The judge may be asked to come
to the village of the plaintiffs, or to a neighboring one, or they may
agree to go to him or to the beit el-mtiqdda, or ،،court-house.” I know
of only one such court-house at present among the peasantry, that
of Musa Hdeb in Dawaimeh. There is also one among the Beni
ØŒUqbah of the Tayahah tribe.
The people of the village must entertain the judges, the expenses
being borne by the Ù¦vhole village. In case the assembly takes place
in the village of the guilty party, his family must meet all expenses.
The accusers walk ahead and the defendants follow, but there is no
meeting. Each party stays in a different guest-house,1 to which they
come on the morning preceding the trial. Before entering the court,
one or both sides' may appoint laÙ¡vyers called liujjaj. The client
publicly entrusts the case to his la١vyer, saying, ،،I have given my
tongue to A to defend my case” (inni a‘tait Isam la-flan liydafi‘ ‘anm).
It is, however, permissible for each party to defend itself. For good
reason either party may change or dismiss its lawyers during the
proceedings. The reasons for appointing a lawyer are: —
1. Inability to defend oneself owing to lack of knoÙ¡vledge of
the law.
2. In case either party is a woman.
3. When the plaintiff and the defendant are of unequal social
rank. The nobler one considers it a dishonour to face his inferior
4. When one or both parties are still in a very excited state.
1 Generally there is only one macfdfah in each village, but when a village is
divided into two different factions, each establishes a madafah of its own. In
case the two parties appear before the judge in a village other than their own,
the inhabitants will divide at once into two sections, each providing for the
entertainment of a party. The madafah is sometimes called by other names, such
as sahah, qnaq (of Turkish origin), and jdmi. It is generally a large room with
an Oriental oven (ujaq) built in the wall farthest from the door. In many maddfahs
there is a hollow in the centre of the room (nuqraK) in which fire is made. The
coffee kettle is always to be seen on the fire, so that the guests are supplied
with coffee. Each person in the village, is expected xo bring something with
him to the madafah when he comes for the entertainment of the guests. In
front there is an open space where the horses are tied; in summer the visitors
sit here in the shade. Of. p. 38, n. 2.

EL-BARGHUTHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine 47
5. When the Clime is a base one, so that the accused person is
ashamed to appeal' before the assembly.
6. Wlien a party is composed of a number of persons, so that it
is difficult to hear them all.
No special fee is given to the lawyers, he lawyer on each side
endeavours to win the case for his client, and thereby to elevate the
standard of his party. A winning lawyer is often given a new silk
garment, hidm. There are many lawyers in all parts. They win
fame through their skill in oratory, their poetic, speech, and their
noble phraseology. Judges are also chosen from the ranks of those
who liave won renown as lawyers.
When the case is opened, the. judge sits by himself and the contesting
pai’ties appear before him. Each spreads part of his mantle (،dbayeh)
on the ground, and says: “Here is part of my mantle for the truth
(hai farj ØŒabati lilhaqq), that is, I am open to conviction. The judge
then demands tlie rizqah, and asks for two sets of guarantors, one
to -guarantee pa.yment of all expenses by tlie guilty party (the knfala
daf،), the other t٠0 prevent the accused party from further trans-
gression against the other (the kufala wian‘). The guarantors must
be equal or superior in rank to those whom they guarantee.
To the first guarantoi’ the judge says: Btikfal hada el-qd‘id ،ala
ed-diyeh u-bint ed-diyeh? (Will you guarantee that the man who sits
liere will pay the blood-money and what follows it?). By the ex-
pression bint ed-diyeh is meant the jahah and the wajahak If the
judge and the parties come to an agreement on tlie matter, the judge
then asks for a man to stand .security for the good behaviour of the
accused. When the guarantor is found, the judge asks him: Btikfal
،ala man، Iiadol u٠tewq٦fhum ،ala el-haqq whn e٦-l٦aqq? ٠١١١٢ F
guarantee' to prevent these people from further transgression, and
guarantee that they abide by the' truth and its consequences?). If
the reply is in the affirmative, the trial commences.
During the case no talking, smoking, or coffee drinking is per-
mitted.Ø› All follow the course of the process silently and attentively.
The accuser has the right to begin. He says: „Good evening, o judge,
what do you. say regarding my cousin, (or) my little brother (an
illustrative case), of good blood and gentle descent, of spotless
1 This stillness shows the solemnity of the occasion, for it is only during
prayers in a mosque or welt and Koran reading that such stillness is obsei’ved.

48 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
character, generous, always victorious over his enemies, reliever of
distress, sword-brandisher, welcomer of guests, protector of his female
relatives, helper of the poor in his family, thirty years of age, not
yet satisfied with the joys of life, who has not enjoyed his youth (to
the full)? Behold, I demand justice from him, and sprinkle my blood
٢A٦٦ah ،y٩١٦ass٦k btl-lieir ،ya ١u٠e tqub jvb١٦
،a٩٩٦٩١٦٦ a٦t-li٦ie٩٠v tayyib e٦-as٦i jeyyid el٠('ar، tahir ed-detl? ta،،a٩n eg-
gad, qa٦٦٦r e٦-a،da, ٠٦١٦3ك٩دأل٩١٦ e٦-k٩١ub, ٩٦aqil es-؟e٦j?٩٩٦ ١hayy ed-de٦٢١ sat٦٩١
er-ra٦i١n,٠١ jabrr el-a م٩١٦ ibn talaUn ٩١ta s٦b٦c ٩١٦٦٩٦ ga١١a٩٦٦th waba ا٦٦٠م٩ؤ
b-؟ibdl٦, ajah $a٩٦ firn jl ٦٦ ;٩٦-ta١'an٩٦, el-ba٩'hd ١١٦٥ ،abeh ؛abbb, a،tal٦
ei٩٦-٦a٩١ fa-tayyahult 'a٠-a٩١dal٦ ;٦e-aua talik haqqi ٩٦٩٦٦؛٩١٦d٦ ٦t-١٦0٠bir
dammi (؛ ‘aUjddrtn).
The accused pai’ty then steps forward and says (again an illustrative
case): “Good evening, 0 judge, what do you say when blood is boiling,
minds are bewildered, and the one who does not assist his cousin in
battle does not acknowledge, his father. I was dazed and deprived
of my senses and struckØ› God knows I intended no wickedness, and
did not purpose evil, but now what has happened has happened, and
justice is yours to dispense” (.AUah ymasstk Iril-ljeir yd qadi, w-eis
tqttt ٩٧-efi-da٩١٦١١٦ fayw w-e٦-،aql ha٩j٦r w-٦bl٩١٦٥ ٦ by٦t٦؟٩٦t٩١ ib٤ ٩٦a١٦٦٦٦t٦th
jbb-ko٦٦el٩١٦٥ ٦ by٦’٦،٩j? ab٥h,٦٦t-d٠ a، sawabb ٩٦٠١ lisabi ٦t-(٦arabt ٦t-yiSha٥
Allah 1٩٦١٦1, ١١٦٥ a٩٩d e£-؛ei٦ ٩٦eal٥ b٩٦yn es-sa٦ ^٦i-sar ٩١٦٥ sar ٦o-٦-٦٦iuli١١٦
1indaky.s “What do you say when thei'e is neither truce nor trial
between US, and he is the murderer of my cousin. When he met me,
he did not turn aside, and the one who does not take revenge does
not come of a good family (lit. has a bad uncle). I took it and took
vengeance, blood,for blood. My cousin is not base, and if he is not
his superior he is not his inferior, and the one who comes to the
place of justice will not be defeated” (6ةي tqul u-ma beini u-bein flan
1 Hweiyz is the caritative diminutive of mod. Palestinian helyi, “my brother.”
2 rPhat is, the family is highly respected, and no one normally ventures to
attack its members.
3 Lit. ،،clean of skirt (lower part of garment, coat-tails)” i. e. he was not
killed for a mean action.
4 Lit. “uterus, womb,” but here ،،female relation.”
5 lit. “bone,” means here “po.or member(s) of the family.”
Ù¥ The blood of my cousin is really my own blood.
ØŸ That is, he is a bastard.
8 This is a preamble illustrating a case where the killing is admitted.

EL-B ARGHUTHI: Judicial Courts among tlie Bedouin of Palestine 49
٦ai،at،wdl٦ wada q٠a٩wa١(%٦ u٦٦-٠u qatil ibn ،ammd u٠٠afm uiatnahha
ر٩ا٦ر٠٩ز١أ ma byalxucd et-tar din rad¿ ed-٦٦ad٦ j?a-a٦٩aatuh ٦١سةةع٠٦زل٩
(lamm b-٢Iamm.٠١ w-ibn ،avmwb ma hit i١I١ in ٩٦xa I heir mbulx ma
hu dimuh, ٩0-idL٠ yisadmafadd e٦،adl tarah nxa yi٩٦gidib٢٠ة اط٩ .١
you say—praise God, 0 judge —of a mau who is healthy and wealthy,
when ignorance is treacherous and youth is hasty, and a voice summons.
I heard it, and hastened to respond to it. I helped my cousins —and
I am but, flesh and blood —and he who betrays his people will not
protect his women. I smote with zest. By God, I liave not slain his
cousin, nor do I know his adversary, but God is my advocate”
(w-eik tqud—تدالا Adah, لألأ qafb—f4٠٠،if e(Udif١٦ U)،ei-jah٦ bawwaqi
%v-es-s٩ba ٩ هم٩ة٦٠ةأ٩٦٦٠r-e؟-s t jamma؛ tv-ana smifduh, fa-turt deh u-sa،adet
udad ،a١١٦mUv-a٩٦a min dafm damm, ٦v-idd% byinkid qbmok ma yustur
rahmuh ٦t٠Ja٦"Tal٠it kef لزلا w-ayy-Alda١٦ ma tha amt b-ibn ،ammuh,
ada add daltt ٦٩ast٩n W-Addah eUoal).
The foregoing is a brief outline of a typical plea in a case of blood,
abbreviated to avoid tedious repetitions. In a case of rape, or violation
of f'emale honour, typical pleas are the following: „What do you say
of him who is made of water and dust, and exposed to error, whom
Satan has tempted as he tempted our father Adam. Every human
being has a sexual appetiteØ› love leads him and youth drives him to
flirt with women.- I have flirted with so and so—may God protect
her—I did not intend evil, but only love and play (eis tqul fi-illi min
maye n٠tn, ٦i-mu،arra(l dil-٦٦ata %v-agral٠ ٦e^٠dtan kama ٠ag a abuna
Adanx u-kudd insan jhh ^ah eh ysuquh et-bubb, uyidfauh, eS-abab ida-
mu lafla tat en٠nisa xpnaget fdneh uAdtah yustw ؛adeiha w-ana ma
bard minha es-sh !akin hubbeh u٠du،be١.٢١%٦
1 That is, nothing’ has taken place to compensate for my cousin’s death.
2 In illustration of this conception some proverbs may be cited: “Two-thirds
of a boy’s character) come from his uncle” (tulten el-weled, larhaluh); “Only the
man who has a bad uncle will leave blood-revenge unrequired” (md butruk et-tar
ilia radi el-hdl). Hal means “maternal uncle.” [A relic from the days of
exogamy? w. F. A.]
3 Lit. “healthy and warm”؛ meaning a healthy and wealthy man.
4 Lit. “youth is a spear.”
5 Lit. “I caused my palm to rejoice,” i. 0. I lost control over my hand.
6 This is an illustrative case where guilt is acknowledged. Where it is denied
a form like the f'ollowing may be used: —“Praise (lit. pray for) the Prophet,
0 judge, what do you say of a man who sleeps in the night and keeps liis skirts
clean. (Though) I have no knowledge and am ignorant, they impute this calamity

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
There are many variations of the introductory defense in cases of
murder and rape, specimens of which have been given. New variations
are also introduced by the skill of lawyers. If we analyze the types
of defence we sliall find the following categories: —
a. Full confession and apology.
b. Admission of the act, with tlie explanation tliat the crime was
the result of a feud (as in the example given'above).
c. ConfessionØ› but the crime was accidental, and unpremeditated.
d. Denial of personal guilt. The guilt was collective. If there
was a- struggle, in which -many took part, the accused pei’son
denies his guilt, and imputes it to one or several of the party,
without being able to designate the guilty one or ones exactly.
e. Absolute denial with proofs.
The judge listens to the case as presented by both sides, and
then demands the evidence of the accusing .party and the defence of
the accused. But evidence is very hard to find in cases of murder
and rape, whence the saying, “In the case of a murder there are no
witnesses, and there is -no securing proof of a rape” (Id damn ،aleh
shud wala ‘eb ،aleh zvrud). The following types of evidence bear great
weight in a case:-
1. The testimony of the victim before his death that a certain
person is guilty.
2. The confession of the murderer to his guilt in the presence of
people who are free from hatred or covetousness with regard
to the defendant (halm el-gez w-et-tama‘).i
3. When the guilty person is caught in the act.
4. Signs of the crime on the person accused.
In every case the witnesses must be honourable men.
to me. And from the day (from the moment) I reached your sitting room I
arrived at the place of .justice. You see that I cannot be suspected upon the
words of a malicious person (lit. evil-eyed), son of a wanderer.” The Ar. is:
sallx ØŒa-nÙ nebiÙ¡ ya qadi, w-e tqul nÙ n-nayim leluh u-liafi? (Xeiluli, la bi'iain ala
bidm u-birvnu alel b-hal-bal iye h١ u-min ybm ilhiqt maq؛adak xtsilt mahall el-insaf
tarawl ma anthim ala kaia sayilib bin rayih.
1 The c.ommon peasant and the sakkdr (the man who only cultivates a small
piece of ground), sayyaf (gleaner after the reapers), etc. have no right to act as
witnesses. This 1’ule is said to have been made by Ibn is-Smeir of el-IIirsan
(Suhr). It is an old rule that the ndsif el-jild (beardless man) and the maqtu،
el-wild (man who begets no children) have no right to testify.

EL-BARHUTHI: Judicial Coui’ts among the Bedouin of Palestine ٠51
If the accusations cannot be attested by competent witnesses, and
proven to be absolutely true, the judge asks the defendant to give
‘one-ninth, an oath, and five” (e،-،is٤ u-yamin ٥٠٠-،؛. The tis‘
(د tusztf) stands for one-ninth of the blood-money, or 3670 piastres,
a sum which is paid at once. The Jjamseh refers to the oath, which
is to be sworn by the defendant and one of his relations, while three
others of his kindred second the oath, by swearing good faith. The
person who swears with the accused, jeyyid el-amdneh, is appointed
by the accuser, and is always the most honourable and distinguished
of the family of the accused. The three others are called the nkkin,
from zakkd, "to justify.”
The four persons who swear with the accused go to a well-known
saint (weli) or prophet (nebi) to make the oath.Ø› The judge either
goes with them himself, or sends someone else to act as his repre-
sentative. They take off their shoes, and enter reverently. The accused
ci'ouches (yuqarfis) in the niche (mihral)), stretches forth his hand,
and swears. The jeyyid el-amaneh, who is regarded as the most
important of all, comes next. The three others follow to sanction
the oath of the two. If one is absent, a rifle, held by one of the
Htuzakkin, takes his place. The oath, which must not be interrupted,
1’uns as follows: “By the great God (repeated thrice), the creator of
night and day, the only One, the victorious,-who deprives children
of their fathers and makes women widows, who vanquishes kings, who
subdues oppressors, I have not acted, nor killed, nor seen, nor heard,
nor known, nor accomplished evil, nor helped' to do it” (W-allahi-l-
دد» ص [thrice repeated], lialiq elrleil iv-en-nJidr}ekwahid,eliqalihar,myattim
el-atjat, uwammt en-mswa١٦, qahir ¿ttk, U’٩١hd e ؟-؟atn, mi ١١ta
faat, xvala qatalt, IVata aret, xvala snixØŒt, XVata dt, XV ala qaddaxt
asiyeh wcda meinasiyeli). Tlie three muzakktn swear: "We bear
witness by God that their oath and all that they have said is true”
Qihad bxttah inn ØŒyaibm xt-kxill ma qaluh sxulqÙ¡.
When th ejeyyid el-amaneh swears, the judge sentenc'es the defendant
to only one-ninth of the blood-money (see above), or to a thousand
piastres on his entrance (dahleli) and another thousand on his exit
(liarjeh), or again a white camel on his entrance, and another on
1 Those who swear must be ritually clean before entering the sanctuary.
Generally a Friday is appointed for swearing, to make the oath more solemn.

52 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
going out.1 ØŸThese sums are paid when the accused person enters
the house of the accuser for reconciliation, and when he leaves it,2
If the jeyyid el-amaneh refuses to swear, he is asked to explain
the reason for his refusal, and the accused is condemned to pay the
full sum of the blood-money if he has accepted the nomination of
jeyyid el-amaneh. The defendant has the right to reject a man named
by the accusers as jeyyid el-amaneh. This is done when they are
on unfriendly terms, and the former must declare openly: ،،Praise
the name of God, O people, for between me and so-and-so there is
bad blood” (tidkuru Allah yd nas u-beini u-bein flan Sall tc-mall).
The three muzakkin Ù¦vill only decline to attest the oath of the
others when no other members of their tribe are found to take this
responsibility upon their shoulders. Generally none but the powerful
have the right to take an oath. After the oath the accused pays
one-ninth of the blood-money, and is declared free. This ceremony
is called et-tis£ ti-l-bara£ah, ،،one-ninth and innocence.”
In cases of theft and litigation arising from business transactions
Ù¦vitnesses are also accepted after swearing by the Koran, a weli or
a prophet.
If a person is killed and several are suspected, the judge resorts
to the ordeal by fire, ndr ■ et-tajribeh (fire of trial), ndr el-bard£ah
(fire of innocence) or bas£ah. A piece of iron, or a coffee-roaster
(mihmdseh') is heated until it becomes red-hot, whereupon the suspects,
one after the other, come forward to lick it with their tongues. This
barbarous practise is under the direction of the sheikhs of the dervish
order er٠Rifa،iyeh, who are called mubasSi£in. The accused person
says: ana bikawnak £al-baS£ali) mahmul, mazmum, w-el-baSd£ah tv-el-
grdmeh £aleiyi= ،،I challenge you to the baS£ah, you will be carried,
all your expenses will be paid, and I will pay the fee (baSd£ah) for
the ordeal, as ١vell as the other fees.” Everyone who undergoes the
ordeal must pay a fee of 500 piastres for the privilege; this fee is
the baSa£ah. Witnesses accompany the accuser and the accused.
The latter licks the hot iron. He who shrinks back, cries, or shows
signs of pain is considered as the culprit. Originally this custom
may have been introduced to frighten people, and force them to
1 This is done when the guilty family is known to Ù¦>e very poor.
2 Other expressions for dahleh and liarjeh are tehaU and tai1 ah.

EL-BARGHUTHI: Judicial Courts among tlie Bedouin of Palestine 53
speak the truth. Many a man who feels his guilt tries secretly to
find someone to arrange the matter with the accuser before being
brought to the ordeal by fire.1
Another test of the ordeal type, though far more humane, is the
laVah, ،،swallowing,” which consists in swTallo٦ving quickly •and without
hesitation either something hard, like dry bread, or something
nauseating or disagreeable, like medicine. The one that hesitates,
complains, or vomits, is accused, even though he may have a very
weak stomach. Those who perform the act quickly and with
nonchalance are declared innocent, even though they may be the
real offenders. The sheikh frightens the accused by repeating some
magic words and prayers over the articles to be swallowed, pretending
that they thus attain a special potency, which has a different effect
upon the guilty and the innocent.2 There is no appeal from the
result of the ordeal.
After the investigation has been completed, the judge inquires of
the parties whether they have any additional statement to make,
or any objection to present. If not, he closes the case, and pro-
nounces judgment, saying: ،،I have decided * - * and order the
guarantors to execute the decision.” The judge may postpone the
decision until an oath has been administered. This may happen in
the following cases: (a) to secure new evidence; (b) to give additional
weight to the pleas of one party; (c) to allow time for a more careful
study of the case, and its comparison with other cases of a similar
nature; (d) when there is prospect of an amicable settlement. The
judgment is generally pronounced at the close of the first session,
as prolongation of the case may lead people to suspect or doubt the
conscientiousness of the judge.
The Bedouin criminal code does not comprise articles and addenda
to them, but is made up of laws governing specific cases and the
penalties in each case. The principal penalties imposed by the judge
belong to the following categories: —
1 rfhe most important places for the ordeal are el-ØŒOla, Han Ù¡runis (in the
territory of the ØŒAyyadeh tribe), Seih Mabruk (among the ØŒAzazmeh) and among
the Beni ØŒAtiyeh (Transjordania).
2 Cf. the ordeal by means of a draught of holy water (water of jealousy),
Num. 5 li-si, which becomes bitter and causes disease in the body of the unchaste
woman, but does not affect the chaste one at all (Ù¡V. F. A.).

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
1. Capital punishment (el-qisas).
2. Blood-money (ed-diyeh).
3. Banishment (el-jeli).
4. Payment of an indemnity (el-ein bil-ein).
Capital punishment is only imposed in the following cases: —
a. Ù¦Vhen a man violates a married Ù¦voman, Ù¦vhose husband is
still alive.
b. When a man murders a notable.
In the first case, up to forty years ago, the Ù¡voman and her
paramour were both put to death. Now only the adulterous female
is executed, while the man is allowed to buy himself off, either by
payment of a sum of money, or by giving two girls, as described
below. In the second case the murderer was formerly always put
to death. NoÙ¡vÙ aÙ days there is greater clemency, and people are
satisfied with the payment of one or more blood-prices.
Banishment is ordered for a fixed term of months or years when
a person is accused of rape or murder. Meanwhile the impression
produced by the crime is partially effaced. If the two parties have
not come to terms the culprit is liable to be killed by one of the
plaintiff’s party (garim), an act which goes unpunished.
The payment of an indemnity is only prescribed by the judge in
the case of damage or theft of movable property other than coins—
including the kinds of property known as ‘urucl.1 For example, if a
sheep is stolen, a sheep must be paid as indemnity; a camel is given
for a camel, an ass for an ass, and so on. The payment of the
price of an article is also permissible especially in cases where the
original object cannot be returned, as when a tent is burned, or a
pile of wheat is destroyed. When the stolen property cannot be found
itself, it is replaced by similar property, or the estimated price of
it is paid to the owner. Blooded horses (asayil)- are a case where
such an estimate is difficult. As pedigreed horses are virtually never
sold without faivayid^ the owner insists on receiving a horse equal
1 Pl. of larad (from ld/raif ،،to offer”), i. e. everything offered for sale except
animals, money, grains and liquids, according to § 131 of the Turkish civil code,
el-Majalleh. The fellah now includes under this head everything but money.
2 Plur. of aszl.
3 Plur. of fayidah, ،،interest on capital.” Whenever a well-bred mare is sold
a contract is made by which two of her female colts are to be given to her first
owner. These colts are called fawdyid, or matdni-

ELÙ BARGHUrrHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine 55
in value to the one he lost, or its price with the addition of the
fdyidah. ØŸThe penalty for the theft of aÙ¥ pedigreed mare is high, and
the thief is under obligation to give compensation for its colts
as well.
The diyeh, or blood-price, is the most important penalty. It is
fixed at 33000 piastres, a sum which is supposed to represent a
hundred she-camels. The payment of a hundred camels for a murdered
man is a very ancient pre-Islamic custom, the practise of which has
continued to the present time. In the case of the Prophet’s father,
a hundred she-camels were paid as ransom. At present some ask
for more than a hundred camels, or 33000 piastres, on the ground
that they are members of a stronger tribe or a nobler party. This
again is a very old custom: kings and emirs were ransomed with a
sum equal to four times the ordinary diyeh.
Property plundered within a period of three and a-third days
after a murder, by the injured party, is not subject to return, and
is not deducted from the diyeh. Property pillaged after the expiration
of this period is either restored in kind, or its price estimated by
an impartial arbitrator, to be appointed by the joint action of both
parties, and the sum fixed is remitted to the owners of the
A diyeh must be paid under all circumstances except when the
murder was accidental, in which case only half a diyeh, is paid. It makes
no difference how the crime was committed, or why, whether in
attack or defence, in a just cause or without right. The same amount
of blood-money is reckoned for a man, a boy, a slave born in the
house,1 a freed slave,2 or a free negro.3 The payment for a slave
who has been purchased by the present owner is half the full diyeli,
A freedman and a slave born in the house pay their share of the
blood-money, but do not receive amy compensation — i. e., do not
share in a diyeh received by their party. The full diyeh is paid for
a murdered woman among the Bedouin, and half to a full one among
the peasantry. A pregnant woman is reckoned at from a full diyeh
to a diyeh and a half, since her child is taken into consideration.
Ù¢The latter is not considered as a fully living being yet, being still
1 1Abd mwallad, a slave born from a slave father in the house of his master.
2 LAbd maltuq.
3 1Abd here means ،،ne٥٠ro.”

56 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
exposed to serious perils (taht el-garaq to-eg-Saraq').1 If a woman
kills a man, her parents, and not her husband are responsible for
the blood-money. If she is killed her husband shares with the
members of her family in the diyeh This distinction is illustrated
by the proverb ٠. ،،The good of a woman belongs to her husband, and
her evil to her family (heir el-marah lajdzha u-Sarrha ‘al-ahilhd). In
case a female is killed by a ravisher, from one and a half to four
times the normal diyeh is paid, because of the combination of dis-
graceful crimes. Miscarriage of a foetus less than seven months old
is atoned for with half a diyeh Often a reconciliation with payment
of fifty pounds or two camels takes place. One of these camels is
given at the commencement of the reconciliation in the house of the
accuser (dahleh—see above), and the other is delivered after the
agreement (Jiarjeh). When abortion is caused after the seventh month,
a diyeh is counted in case the child is a male, and half a diyeh if
it is a female. When the murderer is a young boy, those that are
of age in his family2 * are responsible for the blood-money.
In a general fight, when the murderer is unknown, the ١١7hole
tribe or family must pay the diyeh Such blood-money is termed
diyeh maglideh If a man is found dead outside a village, the whole
village is responsible, and his relatives may even share in making
up the amount. When a man is killed in the house of another, the
murderer must give the owner of the house a white camel and a
black slave. The murderer cannot bring these things himself, but
they are taken under the principle of el-jdhdh This gift is thought
to restore the honour of the man in whose house the shameful deed
was committed،
rThe following important types of murder may be distinguished:—
1. Qail ifrdk, Ù¦vhen the victim dies at once, or within a feÙ¡v hours.
2. Qatt dagmeh, a murder at dusk or in the night.
3؛. Qat‘ intiyeh the murder of an unmarried youth, thus precluding
the possibility of his having offspring, and effacing his name.
4. Nazlet el-ard, murder of a person who is on the point of raping
a woman. In such a case no diyeh is paid.
1 Lit. ،،under (the danger of) drowning and suffocation (in the womb).”
2 On the father’s side. A haclit says, ed-diyeh 1 ala-l- dqilah (relations on the
paternal side).

ELrBARGHUTHl: Judicial Cuts among the Bedouin of Palestine 57
When the murderer is known, he pays one-third of the diyeh, and
his relatives pay the other two-thirds. The heir of the victim receives
one-third of' the diyeh and his relatives two-thirds. The two-thirds
is divided among the males of the family, hoth yonng and old. An
Arabic proverb says: “He who shares in paying the diyeh takes from
it” Qiattat fid-diyeh ahhdd fiha)٠ If a person takes part in a figlit,
though not belonging to either of the fighting families, he must share
in the payment of the diyell if he assisted the side of the murderer,
but does not share in the diyeh received if he was on the other side.
This principle is well expressed in the following proverb: “One who
enjoys (using) his hand in striking must enjoy (using) it in paying”
ا٠۴سب JarroR lafuh ju٦)-٦arb /a/rrahha لأا١ه <؟لل١ لآ ااًلآ .١،ية٠ةكل
between two pai’ties, in whicli several are slain on both sides, the
excess of slain on one side or the other is not considered at'the
time of reconciliation, since it is said: “Burying (lit. grave-digging)
and oblivion (lit. sti’iking back) for all that is unknown and known”
(hafar u-dafdr ،ala md yaba It-ban), i. e. “I et US forget all that has
happened.” The same is true of the spoils in such a case, for
neither the judges nor anyone else can decide justly in so difficult a
If the murderer dies before the reconciliation, the -blood-money is
paid by his family and relatives. رنم
The loss of' any vital organ O1Ù  limb of' the body, such as an eye,
an arm, 01’ a leg, is reckoned at a quarter to half‘ the diyeh. For
injury to the nose half a diyeh is paid. When two organs, two eyes,
a leg and an eye, etc., are injured half to a f’ull diyeh is given. For
a wound in the face, leaving an ugly scar, a quarter of' the diyeh,
لآ هدآلآ jcthah ةلاًلآ wajahah to ذلألآلأ هاًلآ اسح—eb-wijK el-msahhar,
“The blow on the face which is visible.” In the case of 'a slight
wound,.a sheep is offered as wajahah, together with full compensation
for the loss and expenses or damages incurred.Ø›
The penalty in the case of rape is quite different. It' a man
meddles witl'1 a girl, but does not complete the act, he is required
to sweai’ that lie had no bad intentions in touching her, and to
لن٦ذ ا’ the loss of each first incisor tooth 00ة piastres are required as indemnity ل
for each second incisor 250; for the canine on each side 125; for each of the
two bicuspids, as well a.s for each of the two first molars 62 ’/2; for the last
molar 311/4.

58 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
prove the truth of his oath by the testimony of five credible witnesses,
know as the din u-hamseh, ،،religious (cermony) and five.” Moreover,
٦vhen he enters her father’s house he must pay fifty pounds (ddhleh),
and another fifty pounds must be given on leaving it after the
reconciliation Qiarjeli). If the girl belonged to a low social rank a
smaller amount is paid. If the girl is raped, the man is sentenced
to pay double the amount of her doÙ¦vry, and she Ù¦vill be given to
him as a wife. If, however, she is of a better family, he must give
two girls as an admission of his wrong-doing and an application for
forgiveness. A man who abducts a girl with her consent is sentenced
by the judge to give two girls and two dowries, and to bring a
witness to testify that he had not touched her except after a legal
agreement. Such a witness is called mubrtA If he fails to provide
the witness, he must pay five she-camels in addition to the payment
already mentioned. A married woman Ù¦vho commits adultery is
executed, and the offender pays one dowry to her husband and
another to her people, or two girls. If a girl offers herself to a man,
the latter must bring a. witness to testify that he did not touch her
until officially married, and must pay her dowry (i. e. her bridal
price). This is the rule in Transjordania. In Palestine, she is slain
by her relatives. The violation of a widow is generally punished in
proportion to the importance of her family. The ravisher must pay
her dowry and marry her.
If a man assaults a woman in broad daylight or near human
habitations, and she calls for help,2 the life of the offender is at the
mercy of her relatives for three and a third days. If he escapes
death, the following punishments are customary (the practise is now
much less strict in this respect): his arm is cut off; he must surrender
all the weapons and the horse which he had at the time to her
relatives. Besides, he must place a row of camels or sheep from the
place where the rape was committed or attempted to the place where
the girl’s cry was heard. Others then act as arbitrators, and the
number of animals is gradually reduced until it comes within his
1 The official ceremony of marriage must be performed in the presence of
the qadi lalim or the . hatib, but in practise it is sufficient that the man ask the
girl in the presence of a third person, who must be a noble, to accept him as
her husband.
2 Such a ٦١٣oman is known as sayihat ed-duha, ،،she who cries in the morning.”

EL-BARGHUTHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine 59
capacity for payment. If the offender can furnish proof that he did
not touch her until after a legal union, he is allowed to marry her,
and it is said of the girl, ،،Her garments are torn, and her pearls
scattered” (tobha qadid u-barazha badid). Such a man has no right
to ask for a truce (‘atwali), but is known as a msammas, ،،one who
stays in the sun,” and remains in this condition until after the process
is over.
It is well-known that Arab girls are the property of the whole family.
A girl is therefore not her father’s possession alone, nor her brother’s.
If anyone asks for her hand, the father will call all his relativesØ›
and the marriage of the girl will depend upon their consent or
dissent. The cousin, son of her father’s brother (ibn el-amm) has
the first right to a girl, as he is the nearest of kin outside the pro-
hibited limits. Next comes the son of her mother’s brother (ibn el-lial),
followed by the others in the family and the brother of her sister’s
husband, each having a right of priority in proportion to the degree
of his relationship.
A cousin always pays half of a normal dowry. The proverb runs:
،،A cousin may take (the bride) down1 from her mare” (ibn el {amm
bitayyili (an el-faras) and: ،،Follow the circular (i. e., the normal)
path, even if it is long, and narry your cousin even if she is a
miserable (match)” = dur ed-ddrah u-lu ddrat u-lrud bint el-amm
u-lu barat. The dowry (bridal price) is between .2000 and 4000 piastres,
normally. The girl receives only a fourth of her doÙ¦vry, and is
deprived of a share in the legacy of her father and her husband.
She knows the unfairness of this treatment, but dares not demand
greater rights because of the immutability of custom. It is not clear
why she is treated so unjustly in this point, and at the same time
respected so highly otherwise.2
1 If a girl is given to a stranger, her cousin, if lie chooses, has the right,
even at the last moment, to take her. He then takes her down from her horse
in the wedding procession, and takes her home.
2 Among the Bedouin, woman shares man’s struggles, accompanies the warriors,
and even goes into battle with them. AVhoever strikes a woman, even if he ha.s
been wounded by her, is despised. If captured, women are not retained as prisoners,
but are sent home with due protection and honour. In their gazu (razzia) the
Bedouin take the captured women of the enemy tribe with them, not to enslave
them but to send them back to their people with due respect at the first
opportunity. The song of the women during battle has a stimulating effect upon

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
There is no provision among Arab judges for dealing with sodomy,
since the very mention of the practise is avoided. In Arabic there
is no native term for the practise, which is designated by the term
lawat, derived from the name of lot, Abraham’s brother.!
Some of the modes of punishment in the case of theft have already
been mentioned, but a few. others remain to be described. Ù¡Vhen
cattle have been stolen, the judge sometimes orders the payment of
a head of cattle for every step from the spot where the theft took
place to the first halt afterwards. But, as we have seen, it is
customary .to reduce such exaggerated penalties by a gradual
pi’ocess of (reduction, “for the sake of‘ those present.” Punishment
for' theft 'varies according to the relations between the two tribes
involved, viz:
"I..Thefts, from an enemy ti'ibe, radd naqa (declaration of war).
Objects stolen cannot be recovei’ed, according to the proverb,
et-taihdh raihah, “what strays is lost.”
2. In the case of friendly tribes or families, the principle ØŒen biJen,2
“an eye for an eye,” holds, as already described.3 This is also
called boqah, lit. “calamity.”
3. When’ the parties are neutral, stolen objects are returned
f'ourfold, but an agreement naust first be made between the
parties, which may modify the general principle. When the
understanding in regard to the fourf'old payment (tarbl‘) is
the ٦men. They exhort the lattei’ not to fear the enemy fire, and reproach them
for. cowardice, in order to sting them and compel them to stand firm. It is said
that when the men of a certain tribe had a falling out, and began fighting, tie
women appeared, led by one of their noblest ladies, declaiming’ fiery words:-
Shame upon you, 0 men! A dog barks at tlie door'of his house, donkeys play
on their dunghills and bray at their cribs, and feai’ panthers and wolves. And
the man who does not appear small in the eyes of' (does not humble himself to)
his cousin does not seem great to the enemy.. May death carry you off, may
hatred scatter you, may the enemy capture you; see, your foes will seize. US
to morrow. The Arabic runs: Hasa ØŒaleikum, ya rajajil (Fellah pejorative diminu-
ث٢لالا rjal١'٦٠لآةلتآ'ال' ١ el-kelb bi،aD% bab danth, قةأ3٠3٦٠هلاا bitdris ،a٠miha
uHiig ØŒandaundha 'a-bitbardi'ft rd enmurah Ù¦0-id-cUyab w-illi ma ØŒyisgar
libn ØŒammuh ma yilbar ØŒid ØŒaduwuh. Tahaddakum el-beiØŒnÙ¡ m-itaddakm enÙ naija
w-ithattaflai el-qom٦ lad dak m yahuduna (jadakum. لألم هةةت١ا ف١ذ٩ اًهاأل
men were ashamed, and stopped fighting. Later, they were reconciled.
1 The death sentence would be enf'or.ced in such a case.
2 ‘■Ein means not only “eye,” but also, as in ‘ein es-sey, “the very same thing.”
3 Cf. Ex. 21.24, Lev. 2، 20, Leut. 19 21, etc. (T. c.).

EL-BARGHUTHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine 61
reached, the following is said: es-sirqah benna wabba‘ah ta-yinsaf
el-bahr ii-yiribit ‘al-kaff sa‘r; satna b-arba‘ah ziJialdlnaA tarbV
u-kuU ma rah benna mrabba‘ = The theft between us is
(compensated for) fourfold until the sea dries and hair grows
in the palm of the hand. Our goats shall be (reckoned) fourfold,
and our cattle fourfold, and all that has gone (i. e. been stolen)
between us fourfold.”
The hatsah or hajsah,1 2 entrance into an enclosure by night to
steal, is punished by a fine of 500 piastres. 500Ù  more must be paid
at the reconciliation, called sadrah, ،،leaving (the enclosure).”
After pronouncing a decision of any kind, the judge says: ،،rThis
is my judgement; if anyone is not satisfied let him appeal the case
to other judges , or take the advice of the Beni ،Oqbah.”3 The judge
is exposed to the danger of criticism by those present who hear his
decision and by other judges, so his honour and reputation are at
stake. One mistake might lead not only to his oÙ¦vn disgrace and
dismissal, but also to loss of confidence in all the members of his
If both parties accept the decision pronounced by the judge, they
proceed to fix the time Ù¡and conditions of the execution of the
judgement. If one of the parties considers himself to have been
treated unjustly, he asks for a copy of the .decision sighed by the
judge, and appeals to other judges. If the judge or judges to whom
the appeal is made approve of it, execution must follow. If not, the
objection is written on the copy of the decision, which is returned
to the judge who gave it. The latter must intervieÙ¦v the protesting
judge and try to convince him. If he succeeds his judgement is
confirmed. If •not, the first judge must pay the loser in the suit the
difference between his own sentence and that of the second judge.
If the verdict was absolutely wrong, the judge is debarred from
further practice and greatly despised. When the first judge and
his opponent refuse to yield to one another, appeal is made to
other judges, who are usually members of the Tayahah, in the
Beersheba district, the Ulad ØŒAmr, in the Hebron district, the
Masa،id, or the Fa،ur, both in the Gor (Jordan ١٢alley) below Nablus.
1 The Beclouin understand by halal ،،sheep, goats, camels, horses, asses,” etc.
2 Fellah hatasa is equivalent to classical hatlasa (cf. Muhit el-Muhit, II, 2182).
3 The highest court of appeal, especially resorted to in cases of honour.

62 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
The first judgement and the protest against it are both submitted
to these judges, and the losing party finally yields to the other
(fcdajali). The winning party makes its verdict, confirmed or approved,
known throughout the country. The loser (mafluj) must apologize,
and present sheep, etc., to the judge whose decision prevails. This
act is called lafyet el-maji'uj. Both parties have the right of appeal.
In a murder case, when the final verdict is announced, a time is
fixed and the people of the victim are notified. The notables of the
district meet in the village or camp of the murderer. If both parties
come from the same village, they meet in the quarter of the guilty
one. The latter take with them the ivajahah, composed of rice,
sheep, butter, flour, coffee, tobacco, sugar, barley, and even wood.1
The ivajahah must go a little Ù¦vay before the jahah, or notables, who
escort the guilty person to the abode of the injured party. Ù¦Vhen
the procession nears its destination, the turbans or headdresses of
the criminal and his family are removed and placed around their
necks, to signify humiliation and submission. The criminal hides
behind the notables while entering the house of the injured party,
Ù¦vho remain seated. The latter then arise and arrange the headdresses
of the criminal and his family, after which these serve coffee to all.
In the case of the murder of an obscure person, the father or other
members of the immediate family of the victim are exempted from
preparing the meal for the peace delegation, but it is left to the
other members of the family and the more distant relatives.2 In a
case affecting female honour, the injured family may prepare the
food. Nothing is said about the purpose of the gathering until the
food is ready. Then the hosts press them to eat, while the guests
refuse. While this is going on, the judge, who occupies the highest
social rank among those present, says to the people of the house:
،،We will not eat at all unless you promise to give us what we have
come for.” A long argument is carried on until the promise is
1 There is also a small wajahah called lafyeh. The guilty party goes to the
house of the opponent, taking with him a sheep or two, and after making con-
fession and apology asks for reconciliation. This is the practise only among the
common people and when the crime is petty, such as cutting down olive trees
and stealing produce, etc.
2 When the victim belongs to a noble family, his relatives will not prepare
the food, but leave it to the murderer’s family.

EL-BARGHUrTHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine 63
finally made, Ù¡vhereupon all join in the meal. This is a good
illustration of the hospitality and generosity of the hosts, who are
willing to sacrifice everything in order to please their guests.
When the meal is finished and coffee has been served again, one
of the notables rises and says: ،،We are the flesh and you are the
knife” (ehna el-lahm zv-entu es-sikkiri), that is, ،،We are in your power;
you can do with us as you like.” The judge takes a long stick and
a piece of white muslin, which he ties to the top of the stick, making
thirty-three knots, indicating that the blood-money is 33000 piastres.
It is considered a great honour for a man to tie these knots; heÙ¡ is
then spoken of as the man who knots the flag (bi‘qid er-r&yeh) after
bloodshed and violation of female honour. Then the judge gives the
stick to the murderer or ravisher, who stands and holds it up. The
judge appeals to the honour, generosity and chivalry of the injured
party with the question: How highly do you estimate the honour
(lit. face, wiftt) of God, of the Prophet, of Abraham, of X (giving the
name of some notable, who is not necessarily present)?” In other
words, the judge asks how much the injured party is willing to
deduct from the total, which is beyond the means of the average
person. As various names of notables are given, the original sum is
reduced according to the generosity of the people concerned, and
for every thousand piastres deducted a knot is untied by the judge,
Ù¡vho continues until the amount remaining is reasonable. In case the
criminal is poor, he is made to pay in instalments, the third part
at once, and the other two thirds after six months and a year
respectively. Before the guilty person leaves, after the settlement,
one of the bystanders rises, and says: raytak becla yd ra‘i l-yurmeh,
“Your flag is white, O shepherd1 of the fine.”
The system of jahah u-wajdhah, lit. ،،nobility and honour,” i. e. the
nobles (who come with the guilty party) and the present (of food
brought by the latter), as developed among the Arabs of the desert,
is the best possible mode of securing the reduction of the indemnity
and the mitigation of punishment. It also demonstrates and encourages
the generosity of the injured party.
When the murderer flees from his tribe or village, he cannot
return unless or until a well-known person assumes the responsibility
1 That is, ،،owner,” according to the usage in modern Arabic.

64 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
of binging him back to the tribe as a criminal and delivering him
safe to his people (yqvarriduh zdliqn u-yisidclruh salim). The procedure
is then as follows:—The judge binds the hands of the guilty one
together, and escorts him to his 1'oes, either alone, or accompanied
by his people. He then addresses the injured party: "Take X, son
أدع ةذ٢لألآ ١٦٦ ١اً٦أ٢١ Z—يسلم — ١٦ه١ة\٠لآ لألم jlan ibn jlan ،ictd ،!٠١١٠١
The nearest relative o'f the murdered man rises with a sword in liis
hand, or a knife, and asks the accused: “Do you have guaranty 01’
security?” —“No”-“May I then kill you?” The culprit answers
in the affirmative, whereupon the other cuts off his bonds and
forgives him.
If the murderer is accompanied by his relatives, he does not join
them, but sits by himself. When the food is served, his guarantor
will not partake until assured that part of the diyell will be remitted,
After this is done, the whole party joins in tlie meal.
The judge himself makes no attempt to reduce or to mitigate the
decision he has given. On the contrary, he demands that the
guarantors execute it, and the latter are required to see that it is
exactly fulfilled. If for some reason or other the injured- party
refuses to mitigate the severity of the diyeh, the criminal will be
compelled by his guarantors to pay the full suna demandedØ› tlie
lattei’ receive a tenth of the sum they recover from the murderer.
The accusers, however, are practically never so severeØ› they act
honourably and yield. Thus peace is made and the bitter hearts
of foes are reconciled. After a case of blood or honour is settled,
and all the formalities are carried out, the two hostile tribes
become friendly again, and make an alliance. The new relation is
called ‘umumtyek
Some severe and even intolerable punishments have been
mentioned. If the criminal, were not punished severely, he would
continue to do mischief, and othei’s would follow his example,
until the public security would be endangered. Punishments of
extreme severity, now modified, were often very useful in a more
primitive society.
1 This is a very old Arabic (pre-Islamic) custom. See Tarih Ibn el-Atir, I.
%.N.Ù¦wb el-basus.

EL-BARGHUTHI: Judicial Courts among the Bedouin of Palestine 65
To conclude, we find that most of the civil code has its
Bedouin counterpart. If we compare them, Ù¦ve shall find that the
latter is in many respects more exacting and more equitable, as
for instance in the matter of oaths, witnesses, appeal, dismissal
of judges, and the like.

IE cia37 .Ø› du le de Job contient 1Ø› fin des discou s d/Elihou.
ر Avant'de céder la parole Jahvé, Elihou décrit certains
phénomènes naturels qui marquent spécialement la puissance de Dieu.
Le V. 9 commence la- description des vents et de leur action. Il forme
une strophe avec le V. 10 et cette strophe peut se traduire ainsi:
Du sud arrive l’ouragan
Et du septentrion le froid:
Par son souffle Dieu pÙ roduit la glace
Et il solidifie 1’étendue des eaux.
Les vv. 11-12 sont d’une interprétation plus difficile. ,Et en parti-
culier le mot ١٦٥ qui ouvre la nouvelle stroph'e à la suite de la parti-
cule ٩« a suscité beaucoup de commentaires. Le targum Nri١٦١٦٥ et
Theodotion ckXcktov le rattachent à la racine ٦٦٥ «être pur„ et y voient
une allusion à la pureté de l’atmosphère. C’est aussi l’opinion
d’Aben-Ezra. La Vulgate traduit par frumentum et identifie ainsi
avec ٦٥ «blé„, tandis que Symmaque semble avoir lu ١٦٥, ce qui lui
permet de rendre par Kapirco. Parmi les modernes l’opinion qui a
prévalu' consiste à décomposer ١٦٥ en deux mots: la préposition "3
et le substantif ١٦ qu’on fait venir de ،٦١٦ «être arrosé, humide„..
Ainsi Le Hir traduira le Ier hemist. du V. 11 par ((il charge les nuages
de vapeurs», Renan par «il charge la nue de vapeurs humides„. Les
plus hardis transforment ١٦٥ en ٦٦٥ «grêle„ (Duhm, Fried. Delitzscli)
ou en ،٦٦٥ «éclair„ (Hontheim, Budde). Mais il serait étrange que
des mots aussi caractéristiques que ٦٦٥ ou ،٦٦٥ eussent fait place à
٠ l’énigmatique ١٦٥.

DHORME: Un mot aryen dans le Eivre de Job
Or, selon nous, c’est un nom de vent qui doit être le sujet de
n١٦٥١. En effet, le second hémistiche signifie certainement: ((il
pourchasse sa nuée lumineuse),. Le verhe employé est r٥: qui,
dans 38 24, a pour sujet ٥١٦p «le vent d’est». Les mots ٢ ودÎ١٦٥١
veulent dire «fatigue la nue» 1 et c’est le rôle du vent de fatiguer la
nue. Tout le monde connaît Borée, en grec /?op،aç٠, qui est le nom
du vent du Nord: l’aquilon. Ce qu’on sait moins, c’est que /?o/oeaç
est un vieux mot aryen qui existe- sous la forme burias chez les
Cassites ou Cosséens. Le dieu Burias était précisément l’équivalent
cassite du dieu ouest-sémitique Adad ou Hadad, qui est le dieu du
vent, de la pluie, de l’orage.2 Si nous enlevons les désinences, il
reste le radical buri, en grec /?ope. Tel est le mot que nous retrou-
vons dans 1’héhreu د١٦. La vocalisation berî n’a pas de quoi- nous
surprendre. Nous avons ici un phénomène qui n’est pas sans analogie.
Le nom de la ville de Sodome était -primitivement sudum, qui est
devenu usdum. en arabe, mais sedom, ؟٥٠٦, dans la massore. Et pré-
cisement on trouve à côté de burias la forme ubrias. De meme que
sudum a fourni d’un côté usdum, de l’autre sedom, de meme burias
a fourni ubriaS et beri (apres la chute de la désinence). Le V. 11
se traduira donc:
L’aquilon aussi fatigue la nue.
Il pourchasse sa nuée lumineuse.3
Cette explication a le grand avantage de donner la clef du V. 12,
mal partage dans la ponctuation massorétique. Les exégètes sont
d’accord pour placer Yafhnah avant 5دو5ه, ce qui donne un vers
Pour qu’ils exécutent tout ce que Dieu leur ordonne
Sur la face du monde terrestre.
La difficulté gît dans les premiers mots du verset. On n’arrive
pas à en former un vers. Remarquons d’abord que K١H١ «et lui» du
1 En hébreu moderne le verbe n٠٦D signifie «se déranger, se donner la peine
de, etc.».- A ]?hifil «déranger, importuner, etc.».
2 Voir notre conférence sur «Les Aryens avant Cyrus», p. 72 (dans les
«Conférences de Saint-Etienne», 1910-1911). *
3 Une tradition rabbinique, dont l’écho se retl’ouve chez Bai, voyait dans
د١٦ ou ئ٩اد١٦ le nom de l’ange préposé aux nuages ou à la pluie.

68 Ù  Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
:dé rapporte naturellement د١٦ اغ «l’aquilon)). Il est clair qu’on
اً pourra traduire, en-unissant ٦٥nn٥ à ههد٦١مم:
Et lui, tournant en tourbillons.
Malheureusement il ne reste qu’un mot ح٦ل٦لح٦ب٦ل٦ (kethib) ou
د٦لا٢د١؛٦ل١١ (qere) pour le 2me hémistiche. Quelque cliose a disparu, à
savoir le verbe dont NIH est le sujet et dont le complément est
rappelé par le suffixe de Nous attribuons ce fait à un
phénomène d’haplographie et nous proposons de restituer ححل?؛ه «il les
fait monter)) avant ؛هحلبه. LShifil de رلب٦م est précisément appliqué
à l’action de «faire monter)) les nuages de l’horizon (Jer. 10 13, 5116;
Ps. 135 7). La similitude des consonnes رل5ه de ١رل5ه et ؛هحلا5ه explique
suffisamment l’omission du premier mot par erreur d’homœoteleuton.
Si l’on restaure le texte on obtient pour le ٣ hémist. «il les fait
monter à sa guise)). Ainsi le passage de Job 37 11-12 pourra être
interprété de la façon suivante:
L’aquilon aussi fatigue la nue.
Il pourchasse la nuée lumineuse
Et, roulant en tourbillons.
Il fait monter les nuages à sa guise.
Pour qu’ils exécutent tout ce que Dieu leur ordonne
Sur la face du monde terrestre.

THE long controversy over the exact character of Hebrew prosody
is now reaching a point where the main principles may be
regarded as definitely established. Though we may object to certain
extravaganzas of emendation and arbitrary rearrangements, we cannot
well gainsay the results attained in general by such students as
Duhm and Haupt, building on the foundations laid by Budde, Ley,
and Sievers. According to this view, Hebrew metre was accentual,
consisting of verse-units Ù¦vith 2 + 2 beats (lyric), 3 + 2 beats (so-called
qinah, though ،،elegiac” is really a misnomer), and 3 + 3 beats (epic,
as in Job, didactic as in Proverbs, and liturgical). Combinations
of the different measures were also knoÙ¦vn. Epic and didactic verse
was divided into distichs, as has been clear since, more than a
century ago, Lowth introduced the phrase, parallelismus membrorum.
Lyric verse, being set to music, with its recurring airs, was divided
into strophes or stanzas of varying length, often with a refrain.
Strange to say, there are still many scholars who look with more
or less scepticism at the metrical analysis of the Old Testament,
partly from a horror of novelty, and partly because of erroneous
notions regarding ancient Oriental prosody. The idea that there is
no regular metre in Babylonian or Egyptian verse is wide-spread,
but is based upon a series of misunderstandings. It is quite true
that late Babylonian and Assyrian poetry is not always characterized
by exact metrical form, but this is due to the fact that many com-
positions are intended to be literal translations of Sumerian originals,
and that the vers libre which resulted was often imitated. The writer
is inclined to think that this secondary Assyrian poetic fashion has
influenced certain of the Psalms. Yet most Assyrian poems, such

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
as the Creation Epic and tlie Descent of Istar into the Lower World,
are governed by a regular system of prosody, usually falling into
couplets of four hemistichs each, with a caesura, which in the best
cuneiform editions is marked by a.blank space in the middle of the
line. The verse-units, or lines, are 2-1-2, as was established a gene-
ration ago by Delitzsch and Zimmern. A convenient account of
late Assyrian prosody is given by Burney, in his commentary to
Judges, pp. 158ff.
Until recently there was no reason to suppose that the Baby--
lonians or Assyrians were really strict in matters of prosody. Now,
howevei’, tlie situation has altered completely, thanks to the publication
by’Zimmern and Scheil of two tablets of the magnificent poem of
AguSaya, belonging to the reign of Hammurabi-Animurawh (B. c.
2124—2081). This poem follows a very elaborate strophic system,
witli Sumerian designations for strophes and counter-strophes, etc.
Each strophe consists of a quatrain with eight hemistichs, so tlie
verse-unit is 2 + 2. In other poems of tlie Hammurabi age,- sucli as
the liymn to Beltili (Belitilani), another to istar, and an ode to
Hammurabi, we. find not only the characteristic repetition of words
and phrases, but also a complicated strophic structure and a refrain-.
The first stanza of AguSaya, published by Zimmern as istar and.
Saltu (the title was discovered later by Scheil) runs as follows:
L-una’id surbuta
bukrat Nikkal
Istar siwbuta
bukrat Nikkal
،،I will praise the princess,
The first-born of Nikkal,
Istar, the princess,
The first-born of Nikkal,
dmasa lÙ uÙ¦U
أاااا٩ر٩ qa٩١ai
bmasa I-ustasm
Mighty among the gods.
Her valiance I will exalt.
Mighty among tlie gods.
Her valiance I will recount.”
The first section of the poem to Beltili (Cun. Tab. XV, 1 ff.) is
composed of four couplets, each having the scheme 3: 2 + 2:
Zamar Beltili azamar
ibrfa ussira qurddu sime’a
Mama zamarasd
eli dispim it-qaranim tabu

ALBRIGHT: The Earliest Forms of Hebrew Verse
tabu-(e)li dispi u-qaranim
tabu-(e)li liana- nabi-ma liasliurim
el(u)-ulu liimetim zaktitim
tabu eli-(so!) liana- nabi-ma hasliurim
،؛The song of the Lady I will sing—
0 comrades, attend, O Ù¦varriors, hearken!
I sing of Mama, whose song,
Is sweeter far Than honey and wine,
Sweeter than honey and wine,
Sweeter it is Than grapes and figs,
Sweeter than pure cream,
Sweeter it is Than grapes and figs.”
If we turn to Egyptian verse, we find that the work of Erman,
Max Muller,Ø› and now of Devaud 2 and others is bringing order out
of the obscurity of Egyptian metrics. The difficulty hitherto has
been (1) failure to realize the elaborate structure of Egyptian poetry,
and (2) ignorance of old Egyptian vocalization. The present writer
is about to publish studies which will partly remove these dif^culties.
As generally recognized, Egyptian metre is also accentual, and the
verse-units are generally 3 + 3 or 2-1-2, though short lines without a
caesura are also found. Just as in Babylonia, the most perfect
prosodic development is found about 2000 B. c., during the great
literary revival- of the Twelfth Dynasty. One of the most beautiful
and formally perfect among classical Egyptian poems is the “Colloquy
of a Misanthrope with his Soul.” Commencing where the text is
best preserved, line 86, we have three successive divisions, each with
a regular strophic system of its own —A. 86-102; B. 103—130;
c. 131—142. A has eight strophes, each with the same beginning
and the same tripartite scheme 3: 3 + 3,-e. g.:
â– ØŒmkVlxrny
ink sty ’sw /،hnc S'١nxv pt٠t’t
“Behold, my name is a stench —
Behold—more than the odour of ,¿-birds
In summer days when the. sky burns.”
V أر٢. Liebespoesie der aXten Aegppter, لآد—هد.لآلآ.
2 Cf. Recueil de Travaux, XXXVIII, 189.

72 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
JB offers a series of sixteen strophes, each similarly introduced
and with the same strophic scheme 3: 2 -2 + 2 -ا (except last, which
has 3: 21-2), e. g.:
لاس nm iwyn,
زدأدآلأ ،um imryh ٩٦٠sy ٩١٦٦٠ l٦٩i
“To whona sliall I speak today?
Hearts are evil؛ That man hath no heart Upon whom one relies.”
c presents six stanzas, each with the same beginning and strophic
structure, metrically tlie same as in B (the last strophe has 3: 21-2:
2 + 2) but resembling AS repetition of mk twice in each strophe
with its twice-repeated my e. g.:
٩ ع٩٩٩-٧لأn-٦iy ٩٦لأ٩٩٦
،m/y-sty ،n٩٩٦ ٠٧y-٦٦٩nst لالألأ ٦١٩٦٧ ٧لأعا٦-أ٩ا١٠
“Death stands before me today
Like the fragrance of spices, Like sitting under a sail
On a day of breeze.”
When after a close occupation with Egyptian and Babylonian
metres of the classical period, the writer reread the Song of Deborah,
he was struck at once by the fact that its climactic parallelism, to
employ Burney’s happy phrase,؛ though found only very rarely and
sporadically in later Biblical and Oriental poetry, is obviously derived
from the poetic style fashionable in both Mesopotamia and Egypt
during the first half of the second millennium. The affinities are
much closer with the former, as will be seen, but the time has long
since passed when sober scholars attempt to derive all cultural
elements of the Syro-Palestinian milieu from a single country,
especially since we now know that mutual influence of the two great
ancient civilizations upon one another may be traced back into the
fourth millennium. The merchants and travelers who circulated
between Mesopotamia and Egypt exerted a profound influence on
the land through which they passed, as archaeological- research in
Palestine has so vividly illustrated. Thanks to recent discoveries,
elaborately presented by Langdon,2 it is now certai.n that the phra-
١لآهلآلآللأأ٠ا The Book of Judges, أ1.لآلآ
لآ Jourual of the □Royal Astatic Society, لألألآ—لآنلآ ,إلأوا.

ALBRIGHT: The Earliest Forms of Hebrew Verse 73
seology of Hebrew psalmody has been profoundly influenced by
Babylonian terminology. Most striking is the fact that the ordinary
Hebrew word for “song,” sir, is a loan from Bab. seru, siru, “song,
strophe in a longer composition,” itself etymologically identical with
Arab. si‘r, “poem." As Langdon has pointed out Assyr. zamar seri
is the equivalent of Heb. mizmor sir..
If one beai’s the cadence of the Babylonian, hymn to Beltili in
mind, it will be seen at once that tlie Song of Deborah falls without
a single disturbance of the order of stichi, and with the excision of
only a very few variant lines and obvious glosses, into fifteen strophes,
with the scheme 3 2 بى 2)3 :3؛). A few stanzas are incomplete, having
only two lines 2 2 بى. The Babylonian poem agrees further in the
character of its climactic parallelism and in the style of the opening
،،0 comrades, attend, o warriors, hearken!
The song of the Lady I will sing.”
The Song of Deborah begins its first tetrameter tristich with
the lines:
“Hear, 0 kings, Give ear, o princes!
For I to Yahweh, Even I will sing.”
The following reconstruction follows the stichic tradition preserved
in the Masoi’etic Bible with hardly an alteration, except that tlie
four-foot strophes should be 22Ø›, in accordance with the general
1’ule in Babylonian and Hebrew verse. In the main, the text of the
Song in the Masoretic form is excellent, as attested also by LXX,
but the pointing is often impossible, and the pronominal suffixes and
other endings have suffered more than once from dittography. The
writer owes most to HauptØ› and Burney.2 Haupts reconstruction
is altogether too drastic and arbitraryØ› it is incredible tliat a text
in the Heptateuch should have fallen into such a state of corruption
as his emendations presuppose. Yet the writer owes a great deal to
the thoroughness of Haupt’s analysis and. the completeness of liis
treatment. Burney’s treatment is cursory and rathei’ superficial, and
1 See his treatment in studien zur semitischen Philologie * * Julius Well-
hausen * * gewidmet, Giessen, 1914, pp. 191—226.
2 Op. laud., pp. 160h'.

74 Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
his emendations ae sometimes singularly infelicitous. To him, bow-
ever, we owe the first clear explanation of the unique poetic style
of the Song, and the invention of tlie term ؛؛climactic parallelism,”
from tlie discovery of which it results that the text has suffered
more from haplography than from dittography. His restoration of
the metre' suffers from the frequent occurrence of more than two
unaccented syllables before the ictus; it is very improbable that a
poem so perfect in structure would tolerate a metrical anomaly of
this nature.!
3 2()،حه٦رل مل™ د١ملأ دج٦لد٦ث"رله د٦د١"ح٦ I 2
١ ه5ب١هل١د٦١جب١هJF 3
،دذ١ »ي٦٦١« n١n١5 ش١
5خ٠ا١١ض n٦n١5
1 Cf. Arnold, in Harvard Theological Review, XIII, 188. Burney’s theoretical
reconstruction of the orig’inal plionetic form of the Hebrew in our poem gives
us results possible in many cases for tlie third millennium B. c., but not for
the twelfth century-to be naore exact, about 1150 (see the writer’s paper, Yeme
has-saharut sei ha-lam haJivrt, in Has-Siloah) Jerusalem, Vol. XXXIX, pp. 28ff.
and “A Revision of Early Hebrew Chronology,” Journal of the Palestine Oriental
Society, Vol. 1, pp. 49—80). Since the publication of Bauer and Leander’s
Hebraische Grrammatik, and Leander’s important article on Hebrew historical
١لل ١ اً١هد٢ة٢لآل٢ل١لآ ztschrift der Detsclen Morgenlanclischen Gesellschaft, NÓV.14,
pp. 61 ff., it is clear that tlie Hebre.w of the twelfth century was not particularly
arcliaic. When we bear in mind that the literary language of ancient Oriental
peoples,' like that of modem ones, lagged far behind the evolution of tlie popular
speech, we will not expect a serious difference between the Hebrew of the Song’,
which represents the folk-speech -of its time, and the literary language employed
three to five centuries later. We must also remember that the Masoretic
vocalization arose as a protest against an Aramaizing pronunciation of Holy
Writ, and often went too far in its zeal, as in the case of the pretonic games
and the vocal sexed.
2 This liturgical phrase is doubtless to be pronounced barku-ydh or even
barku-yah, just as the original n١H٦%؛١١ is shortened in the liturgies to halleluyah.
3 V. 9 gives us a misplaced variant to tlie first line of the poem, written in
the margin, and later incorporated into tlie text along with a small group of
obvious glosses in 8, 1 :
[د٦د١-ا٠ا7[٦١أ Djp ١١ملأ ٦،ه١ءد٦ت١ه|?p١n(?٥)5) بي١
My lieart is with the rulers of Israel, Who enlisted witli tlie people—praise Yah ؛
Here tlie line adopted in the text is decidedly preferable to the variantØ› on tlie
other hand, the variant line V. 15لأ, to 16 لأ, though insei’ted in the wrong place,
while 16لأ is in the 1’ig’ht one, is preferable to tlie latter. For a possible ex-
planation of tlie origin of the variant in V. 9 cf. Haupt, p. 211, n. 82.

ALBRIGHT: The Earliest Forms of Hebrew Verse 75
ه II ٠٦١٦١ دلام ٦١۴٥
r٦R ٦؟٦٥
5 ٥١٦٦ ؤالآ١ 2
6 III د١؟١ عئهب٦ ذأ-حل؛٦
٦١لأ؟١ د1ل١؟٦١
7 ٦٦؛1 ١١١٦٥
دلا?٠٦٦٥٥٦٦ »٥١٦
ده-ه؟١ه د؟ه1ا []
د١؟1١()4 ٦٦خ١ »٦^٦٦
١لآد1[]5 py؛p؛n١
د١ه٦»<؛ ٦٦<١5
٥p٥؟٠١»6٥ دام?![]’
several MSS), and Hexaplar (see Moore, ad loc.) ¿rapdxOy we) ى 1 In v.iew of
dripped.” The heavens may pour؛؛ ,١٥٥٥ instead of ؤئئ٩ should probably read
down floods of rain when Yahweh appears in his majesty as lord of the thunder,
drip” is an anticlimax, and here so absurd that a scribe felt impelled to؛؛ but
the clouds (also) dripped water,” that is, the؛؛ ,ده حلد١ه دهؤ١ ٥١٥ add the remark
heavens did not leak, but the clouds distilled a gentle shower.
raXevOvaav and the fact that in Is. 63 19, 64 2 this verb is pointed)¿ ي 2 In view of
there can be no doubt that the stem is zll, belonging witli Ar. zlzl, ,٥١٦٦ with داب
”.slip؛؛ ,"quake, of eartli,” and zll
that is, Sinai,” is a gloss,؛‘ ,٦٢، ه١د١ All serious scholars agree that the phrase ٥.
restricting tlie general statement to Mount Siniii. Ehrlich’s objection to tliis
in early ٦٢، the use of ؛usag’e, is unwarranted ؛interpretation, on the basis of late
this,” and in the commentaries؛؛ ,م.Hebrew as here is precisely like that of Eg
that is.”؛؛ to tlie sacred texts
in the text is naturally impossible, as there is no room for an ١رل?ا 4 The
additional name in the line, to say nothing of tlie sei’ious historical objection,
we liave substituted ١١٥١٥ in tlie ٦ is perhaps a corruption of the original ١ The
may be due to the misreading of a ؛5 of tlie Hebrew text. Tlie ١٥١٥ for the
,partially erased dittography of tlie first letters of nÙ¡t?p5pv in the line below
evidently due again to vertical dittography, since tlie ,»٦١٦٦ itt has here ٥
caravans” in tlie preceding’ verse, while here it would have to؛؛ word means
”.patlis؛؛ mean
in the second person feminine may ١٥ The ending Pronounce saq-qamtem٠ ٠
be an archaism liere, but it may also be merely liistorical spelling. The glosses
in tlie Amarna Letters sliow tliat tu in the first person liad already become
so it is more tlian likely tliat ti in the second feminine liad become t. At all
events, it would so be pronounced before a vowel —the alef in Hebrew lias
almost tliroughout lost its consonantal force.
7 Between the end of this stanza and tlie beginning of the next there are
several glosses, wliicli have lieen gi’ouped together for lack of a better place.
8 contains three glosses. .٦٢ .V. 9 has been discussed in connection witli .V. 2
,is probably a tlieological explanation ١٦٦٥١ (.liapl ,١) »?٥١٦٠ ٥١w٦n ,Tlie first one
they follow crooked patlis.” The؛؛ ,they (shall) clioose new gods,” for the text؛؛
Is shield seen or lance Among؛؛ هدأ »٥"٦١؟٦ ٦٥١١١ ٥؟٥١y٥٦ »<٩5 ٦٢٥١٥»line 5

Journal of tlie ØŸalestine Oriental Society
0ل IV ٦دب١ »٦لبn١ I[]n٦٦n٦٤
11 ?¡١<،2 ه0لالا١ه
يه الردا
لأ٦?ل٦ل ٦٥ د١
12 V رل٦١ا والالا ٠٦٠۴٥٦
<ل١ه[]5 (٦ئهر-٠ئب٦١
13 »!(١) ٦٦١(^)٠
(٦)٦٦١ <٦)٠٦١-٥y
٦1لأ؟١ رلب٦٦٦ با١٦
لا٦بآ٦٦ر I٦٦n١
دام؛ ب (٦١لب١) 3 []4
لزادا جل١٦١ ٦د٦ا-^٦١
١٩ »داجذه
(رل)ج١ ()دد١٩1ه’
forty thousand in Israel?” cannot well be original, since the Israelites would
hardly celebrate a great victory by boasting that they had no weapons at all.
It is perhaps a comment to V. ?a, borrowed from some other poem, on the part
of a scribe who was thinking of 1 Sam. 1319-22, wliere it is stated that the
Israelites liad no swords or lances. The preceding remark عئحل١٦ع □nb ٥١٠أ is
obviously a tertiary gloss, commenting on tlie absence of arms by quoting Jud. 713,
“Then was the barley bread,” i. e., just as tlie barley bread, representing tlie
fellah host of Gideon, overwhelmed the Midianite camp, so the unarmed Israelites
defeate.d the army of Sisera, thanks to special divine interposition.
1 The phrase ١١٦٥ 5١ رل>, whicli is in a different naetre from' the preceding
and following hemistichs, and completely spoils their antithetic parallelism, besides
being unintelligible Hebrew, is perhaps corrupt for some such phrase as ١١مهت١ ١١٦
“judges,” meaning that only judges, i. e. nobles, liad the right to ride on red-roan
(so Haupt) asses.
2 Ù  has bÙ¡pÙ¥, evidently influenced by tlie initial Ù¥ of the two following nouns.
3 In tlie repetitious style of our poem there is constant danger of haplography
or haplology. The cliiastic order follows tlie example of V. 7 a. Chiastic ordei’
is most characteristic of elegant literary style in Assyrian.
4 The following phras.e, ،١٦٦١ بئحل١٦ه رل□ ٦١٠٦١ TR, is not metric, and lias no
connection with tlie preceding or the t'ollowing strophe, so may belong witli the
group of glosses in vv. 8-9. In this case it is apparently a comment on the
gloss D٦٦Ptf on؛ tR, ,which Masoretic tradition took to mean (of above for the
true interpretation) “then to them were gates” (Moore says that it is difficult to
imagine what is meant by the anomalous pronunciation of DnØ›, but it evidently
indicates a qere ؛٥،٦>), which our gloss explained as “then the people of Yahweh
went down to the gates.” ى has ر(؟ع6حةاً) حل١٦ه a valueless guess.
5 The interpolation of pm is wholly ’superfluous, since “son of Abinoam” makes
the pei’son addressed known. The following ١ is a secondary insertion.
6 The Masoretic tradition still derives the verb from ،٦٦٦, as shown by the
pointing, so there is no objection to adding a ،٦; it remembered that the
original text did not have matres lectionis, and that where they are found they
are latei’ insertions. Tlie ٩ which should be affixed to TR was lost by haplography.
7 ٦٦١ ؛١ ددد١٦١ه ٠, which is unintelligible. Haupt suggests ٦٦١ <١5 ددد١٦١ه, “went
down as warriors” but on account of the parallelism with the preceding line our
reading seems preferable.

7 7 allies، Forms of Hebei- Verse؛ ALBRIGHT: The I
*1„ VII »٦۴٥١٦٥ عح٦اتعزهم2 ٦١٦nN ددا؟١أ درل0ه3٦١
-٥١٦٥؟٦١ ,٦٦٦٩ لي ١□
()هاد١؛أ ٥^٥١٩ ت۴ده ٦٥٥
15 []ه هه٦6٠د٦٦ا[]7 درلاه? (١)ى١ه ٦0دؤ8١١ []9
1 Since it interfee.؟ with the metre the introductory ١٥٥ is evidently vertical
dittography from the next line, where the metre requires it. Quite aside from
metrical considerations, the second hemistich shows that Ephraim, Benjamin’s
brother, is the subject.
2 Virtually all scholars read pد ٥ instead of دحلها5م أير, following important
hiss evidence (cf. Moore). It is possible that for ۶هج٦حه0 لير we sliould read DW ٦p.
ي read the same consonants, though rendering differently, هآهنك٤م€ءتج My suggestion
is in accord with the frequent repetition of yerbs for poetic emphasis in our
3 ٠ lias دحلهه٦١, but the suffix is clearly dittograpliy of the suffix in the
preceding ٠٦١٦HN.
4 To preserve consistency, I point tlie verbs as present or imperfect instead
of perfect.
5 Tliis passage is unquestionably corrupt, and our reconstruction may be quite,
wrong. According to Jos. 19 13 Daberath, i. e. Deborah (see below) was on-the
border between Zebulon and Issachar. y. 18 of the Song shows that it was
already considered a pai’t of Zebulon. A later scribe, however, may have supposed
tliat the missing Issachar was referred to here, and liave inserted it, which
would also account for the strange repetition of the name twice inthe verse —an
erroneous double entry in different lines. It is improbable that Issachar was
originally mentioned in tlie Song, since it is an opprobi’ious .term, "hireling,”
applied by tlie Israelites in the hills to their Hebi’ew brethren wlio formed
part of the dependent peasant population of the plain, under Canaanite over-
٥ Tlie pointing’ DP, “people,” instead of ٥y, “with,” is certainly rig’ht (see
7 One may suspect tliat دم is an explanatory g’loss to tlie first word of tlie
fifteentli verse, reading’ 1] instead of أير. Tlie “prince” wlio is thus associated
with Deborah would naturally be Barak. The impossibility of tlie present text
is well put by Moore.
8 Tlie present text lias ٦١5>٠ د٦د, which is very queer, and cannot be connected
with what precedes.
٥ Tliis is a cori’ect marginal substitution for tlie somewhat corrupt line now
in place, V. 16لأ.

Journal of the’Palestine Oriental Society
VII1 (د٦)الج٦0ا ٠٦يد „ 2٥١rn
ده5ب٦١ل ٦»٦جأ
17 د5رل٦ د؟د٦
١٦١ جه٦
١٦٣KVHIيد ()٥١٥١٠٩١٦
أت?،ا ?٩٠١٦٠٥
18 ١به٦ج١
19 IX ١٩ ه5ب١ه دبا٢هل٦
(دلآل٢؟1)5 ح٦لحلب٦
دل١رل٠به٩ ؛»"؛?¡6in
20 ٥١٥٩٥[] 0د١دبئ١ه[]7
5حئجحل مئ٦ج،٦٦ل ?٥١٦٦
د١٦ج١ه ٦?إ7ا١٠١دلإ
١٦٦١٠٦ «ب١
د٦١ »دح٦٦ل
ض١ 5ه٦٦ل
,ل?!-١٥٦٦٥ ى٦٦
[]ي د<؛10٦ هلآبذ١ 3ب?١
حلي-؟١ هد١٦
د؛٦ه1 حله٠ه١ه٦»
1 The present text hangs in the ail’, and we do not know what tribe is
intended؛ V. 17‘٦ shows that we may expect the name of a tribe before لآه٠٦, while
the metre indicates a short name. The tribe in question is Transjordanic, since
it is pastoral and followed by Reuben. Accordingly it must be Gad, the absence
of whom from the present text has given 1’ise to all kinds of liypotheses, especially
that Gilead - in 17 a takes the place of Gad. But from Num. 3234 ff. it is clear
that Gad originally occupied northern Moab, as stated also in the Mesha Stele,
while it is expressly stated that Machir occupied Gilead.
'د I has D١n٥٥۶٥rT د١٩ rn n٥5. The change of tense in the verb may be
erroneous but the present haphazard alternation of tenses is very strange, and
imperfects seenl to predominate. The word D١rw٥ (pl. l’ather than dual) is a
crux interpretum, but the only etymologically reasonable explanation is ؛؛piles
of rubbish, manure,” referring to the extensive mzdbil, which surround the
Transjordanic village, especially in tlie Hauran. In western Palestine the mzdbil
(sing, mezbeleh) are not nearly so striking a feature, sinbe there is not so much
animal husbandry. The cognate ؛؛rubbish, manure,” belongs (which has
not been .observed hitherto) with Ar. tdfat, ؛؛rubbish” (note the transposition).
The 8uperflous د١١ is probably a dittograpilic reminiscence of the د١١ before 0هى»د٩.
3 Of. above. Tlie marginal correction seems here to be preferable to the form
in place. The variants ٩ n and ١٦pn may indicate tliat the original was different؛
cf. Ar. hqf, “beat, of the heart” as a possible suggestion. Howevei’, hqq means
properly “to pierce” (Ar. ihtaqqa) and in Al’, also ؛؛to afflict,” so there is no
serious objection to its l’etention.
* ا« is a supei’fluous scribal insertion to make sure that the reader would not
mistake the highly poetic repetition for dittogi’aphy.
Ù¥ A stylistic peculiarity of the Song requires the repetition of a verb with a
prepositional phrase modifying it, unless the metre forbid.s it. Here both style
and metre seem to demand it, .so we may assume has fallen out by
haplography, since the same verbal form is found twice in the preceding line.
Now, since there is a superfluous دلآ1اه٦ in V. 20, we may suppose that the scribe
discovered his mistake in collating the text and inserted it in the margin, whence
it was transferred into the wrong line later.
6 This hemistich should be scanned as follows, besal-kesf lo-laqdhd.
7 Owing to the common initial ٥ the word □٥٥٥<؛٢١ has changed places with
the following hemistich. The present 01’der is nonsense؛ the stars, that is, the

ALBRIGHT: The Earliest Forms of Hebrew Verse
21 rp bn? X؛I١t د٦هه
(د)وا١ي١ا ٦٦،٦ب١ا
22 »ل(م n<؛io(٥)3
n١٦rn n١٦n٦
XI23 ؟١٦٦ 5١١٦0 »٠٦٥(?)»
ب٦ل5 i٦p؟٥١ (٦،)^
دب حذاً (١١) 2
,١٩PJ ه1؟ه4
(٦،٦٥5) »ت١١٦١
د٠١خ» ٩»ا
ا5رلجم ١„,٦١،
»١٦ »١٦١٦مئب٦١،
elements, may fight against Sisera, but the planets do not fight from their highways
(اق has plur.) against him, nor can their orbits be called “highways.” The use
of harranu in Babylonian astronomy is quite different. On the other hand, ٥٥؛٠٦
is evidently equivalent to Bab. liarranu, girru, “road, campaign.” In sixteenth
century English “road” meant “foray, raid” (a Norse doublet of “road”), as in
the A. V. of 1 Sam. 2710, “Whither have ye made a road today?”
1 I has ٦ك٦٦د١.. Our rendering of the second hemistich requires a passive
form here (see next note). In Hebrew the hifU of tliis verb sometimes serves
as an intensive. Yellin’s suggestion of the Arabic and Aramaic meaning „reach,
overtake” for ٦١٦٦٠٦ (Jour. Pal. Orient. Soc. I, p. 13f.) is very doubtful.
2 اع has ١y ١l, but we should probably read رل١١١ like ١١٦١٦« at the end of the
second line below. Still preferable is perhaps Haupt’s I’eading لأ١ا١١? rm. For
؛he idiom cf. Assyr. napSatsunu usiq ukarri, “I brought their life to a close and
cut it off (cf. Ar. saqa, “be at the point of death, said of a sick man”); baltusun
qdti iksud, “I captured them alive.”
3 This verb is transitive, as in V. 26, so the suffix is necessary.
Ù‡ The Ù¥ belongs with the preceding word, instead of with the following, as in I
5 The ١١٦٥ of عل is probably corrupt., since no town of this anomalous name
is to be found in any Falestinian literature. We should pi’obably read ١١٦٥,
Meron. This Meron is hardly to be identified with either Meiron, w. N. w. of
Safed, or even with Marun er-Ras, fui’ther north, nor is it clear to which Aleron
the Marun of Tiglathpileser III. refei’s. The Canaanite royal city Madon, Jos. 111,
may perhaps be a mistake for Meron, just as Sarid should be *SadOd, modern
Tell Sadud. Probably our Meron is the’ town mentioned Jos. 12 20 with Simon
(text Simon), modern Semuniyeh, on the edge of the Plain, ten miles due west
of Feb riyeh-Deborah and north of Megiddo. A situation in the neighborhood
would explain why Aleron refused to take up arms for the Israelites; it was
too near Hai’osheth, modem Tell ‘Amr, and therefore dangerously exposed to
Canaanite vengeance in case of an Israelite defeat.
٦٥ ه?ا»٦١٠٦١٦ عي ٠« is metrically impossible. It is possible to omit ٥^»٦, which
might have been introduced because of a religious scruple against the conception
that Yahweh curses men himself, but more likely that “angel of Yahweh” was
substituted, as apparently often, for a name of pagan origin, still employed, like
the Lithuanian Perkimas, in maledictions even after the conversion of the Hebrews
to Valwism.
7 The insertion of a ٠٦ is not grammatically necessary, but greatly improves
the sense, besides improving the metre.

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
24 للت ٦ممد٦٦ هدحه١ه اجل؛ []1
25 ؟٥١ ,۴٥؛
٥٥٥؛ »٥١٦١٦
ه1112ت ٥٦١ ؛٦٦٢١١لاح١هده
١ه؛؟ه ٦٥١٥»
,2 ه١ا"٦د١١ه د٦حل
٥١١٥٦٠١١٥ د٦حل
2$ ¥لتدبل1٦٦بث[]4 دئ۶؟ه
١٦٥? هيى
ه١٦?ل »٦٦٥
29آت هد؟1ه ^١٦^٥١ مده
30 ه؛» ١هلا»1
لأدجذاه ؛,٦٥١٥»
٥٥^٥١ د؟ه؛ ٦٦٥٥
٥١٥ د؟ده
١0١1ده ؛ه؛؟1ه D١١oy
٦٥۶٥٥»1۴ []ل
د؟؛ ىبه
ده؛ []3 ى٦1٦
1ه١ده ٦٥١٥٥۴»[]
١٦٥٦ ؛١٦»
»٠٩؟١» ٥١۴٥ »٥١٦٥[]3
٥١؛١۶ ئاً١؛
؛٦»مه٦ عه؛؛
[]'٢ ذه]ل١ه ٥٦۶٦[]’
ا The interpolation ئ٦ل أ٢د٦٦،م١د١« is admitted on al sides to be a learned glo.؟s.
2 ٠ adds the g'loss ١np٦ n٥5m n؛،n٥١. rm is inserted to explain tlie early
Arainaic form HpriD, with orthography like «p٦« for K٥٦K=٣٦K, ٦۵p==٦٥٥,=٦٥٥,etc.١
the p being employed to indicate tlie g’lottal catch («)'into whicli the dad had
been modified in Aramaic like q in the cities of modern Egypt and Palestine.
The alef lost its original pronunciation in Aramaic and became a vowel-letter.
Eater tlie layin was pronounced as a glottal catch, as it still is in parts of' northern
Syria, having lost its correct pronunciation as a voiced 11 with somewhat greatei'
contraction of the glottis. Another Aramaic form found in the poem is the paliel of
mn, employed like Assyr. sunnu, ‘؛recount, relate.” These Aramaic forms are not
late glosses, nor are they strictly dialecticØŸ they are rather an indication of a
mixture between the Aramaic tongue originally spoken by the Hebrews and tlie
Hebrew which they learned in the land of Canaan, and are thus on a par witli
such an Aramaic word as ت٦٦, “vow,” which lias superseded دأ٦ , only preserved
in the specialized meaning “devotee,” د٦١١ Ilauer and Leander have recently
called our attention to evidences of dialectic mixture in morphologyØŸ there are
also a number of Aramaic loanwords in early Hebrew. The additional gloss
*‘she pierced his temples” is harmonistic, designed to make the original poetic
version, according to which Jael. felled Sisera while he was drinking, square
with the well-known prose version. The two cannot be harmonizedØŸ see Moore.
و The observation 5٦ د٦رل دهl, “wliere he stooped tliere lie fell,” is
anything but poetical, and ٠١١٥۶« is not found elsewliere in the poem. It is also
harmonistic, and means that he fell dead where he crouclied, without moving
from his place— thanks to the “nail” which fastened liis head to the ground.
4 I, l٦5nn وححل٦ is simply a’ gloss explaining the archaic term ۶ه1دد«, on wliicli
see Haupt, ad loc.
5 The n5> is wholly superfluous, besides being metrically awkward, and is
obviously susceptible of' ready explanation as dittography.
G The ۶ه١لآلأ of ٠ is dittography of the preceding 5٥۶؛, because both are
followed by the same word.
7 The four-beat line wliicli follows may belong to the originalØŸ one would
like to rea.d f'or 55 ,6؛١»١٥۶١٦ 6؛n هلأ١»١٦, “f'rom the backs (lit. necks) of the slain.”

ALBRIGHT: The Earliest Forms of Hebrew Verse
The poem may be translated as follows:
When locks were long! in Israel, When thefolkresponded-praise Yah!
Hear, 0 kings. Give ear, 0 princes,
For I to Yahweh, Even I will sing,
I will sing to Yahweh, Unto Israel’s God.
Yahweh, when thou rosest from Seir, When thou marchedst from Edom’s land.
The earth was quaking. The heavens shaking.
The mountains rocking Before Yahweh’s face.
Before the face of Yahweh, Israel’s God.
In the days of Shamgar ben Anath, In his. days the caravans ceased,2
And wayfaring men Followed crooked pathsØ›
The yeomanry ceased. In Israel it ceased.
Till thou rosest, 0 Deborah, As mother-city in Israel. 3
0 rideis on tawny asses, 0 wayfaring men, attend!
To the sound of the cymbals. Between the drums,*
There they will recite The triumphs of Yahweh,
The triumphs of his yeomen In Israel they will tell.
1 This rendering may now be considered practically certain 5 cf. Haupt, ad loc.
جلآل١اةةلآج٦١ (Das Alte Testament im Lite des alten o٣ets١ A٠١
p. 423), “When Pharaohs ruled in Israel,” deserves notice solely as a cui'iosity.
2 This rendering is quite certain؛ in Assyr. harranu, “road,” also means
“caravan.” Shamgar was chief of the Canaanite town of Beth Anath, modern
Banah, Talmudic Beall, a little to the northeast of the Plain of Accho, as the
writer has shown in tlie papers mentioned above. His role of robber baron is
like that played by Sutatna (so) or Zatatna of Accho in the Amarna Tablets ؤ
the latter also robs tlie caravans.
3 There can surely be no longer any doubt that Deborah was originally the
town of that name at the foot of Mt. Tabor, as first suggested by Carl Niebuhi’,
and accepted by Haupt. For the origin of tlie confusion between the “mother
in Israel” i. e. the metropolis, cliief city (as in 2 Sam. 2019) and the feminine
figure of Hebrew legend by the same name cf. the note on the subject in tlie
writer’s article {Journal of the Pah Orient. Soc., Vol. I, p. 61). The town, whose
remains lie to tlie north of tlie modern village of Debure (so pronouncedØ›
Deburiyeh, not Deburiyell is tlie. literary form), is called in the 0. T. elsewhere
Dbrt, tlie Dabaritta of Joseplius and tlie Dabira of tlie Onomasticon. The ex-
pression for “city” Used in our text is not peculiar to the Hebrew of tlie Bible,
but is also found in Phoenician. On Sidonian coins Sidon is called mother of
Carthage, Hippo, Citium, and Tyre. On Laodicean coins tlie city is termed
!٥ دددحل«, “mother in Canaan” (tlie reading WK which some have substituted is
4 Tliis passage lias been a crux interpretum. Haupt rendei's, “At the trumpet-
call from the banquet؛” Burney emends with unusual recklessness, and gives US
a pretty conceit, “Hark to the maidens laughing at the wells.” Haupt’s D١٦٥n٥

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
v Awake, awake, 0 Deborah!
،،Arise, take thy captives,
For then the survivor
The people of Yahweh
vi 0 Ephraim storm,storm into the v alley -
From Machir’s folk
From Zebulon those who wield
While Deborah’s folk
vn Why does (Gad) dwell on dung-heaps
In the vales of Reuben
While Gilead dwells
And why does Dan
vm Asher dwells on the shore of the sea
But Zebulon is a people
And Naphtali, too —
ix There came the kings and fought,
They fought at Taanach,
No silver they won
For the stars from heaven
x Kishon’s torrent s١vept them away,
In the Kishon Ù¦vere trampled
For the hoofs of their horses
Rearing, plunging,
Awake, awake, sing a song:
Abinoam’s son,
Will rule the haughty,
Will rule the mighty.”
After thee come Benjamin’s clans!
Come down the captains,
The staff of the marshal,
Sends footmen into the valley.‘
Harking to pastoral pipings?
Ù¢The chiefs are faint-hearted,
Beyond the Jordan.
Become attached to ships?1
And settles on his harbours —
Which dared to die —
On the heights of the plain.
They fought, the kings of Canaan.
At Megiddo’s waters;
From their campaign,
Fought against Sisera.
An impetuous torrent becoming;
His living warriors,
Struck them down,
They struck down his strong in
and Burney’s n١pn٥٥ both seem unnecessary, since' a much more natural ex-
planation is at hand; I would combine the word with Ar. hadda, hadhada, “shake,”
hadad, “shells,” and hadad, “shell necklace, fetters,” etc., and render either
“cymbals,“ like هلاا٦١5ل) هلاا٦5ل١ه, Zech. 14 20, refers to a string' of bells or small
pieces of metal for tlie adornment of horses), or “sistra,” like 2 ,هدحذدحت٦ه Sam. 6 5.
The word D١3Nt0٥ belongs with Ar. mis ’al), “leather skin,” and probably means
leather drums or tambourines (cf. Sachs, Altdgyptische Musikinstrumente, Leipzig,
1920, pp. 5ff.). The women of ’the Qureis, at the battle of Ohod, beat drums
(akbdr) and tambourines (dufuf and garabil), according'to Ibn HiSam.
1 We seem to have ٠a most important chronological datum 'in this line. .Ban’s
residence on tlie sea-coast preceded the Philistine occupation. On the other
hand, our poem dates from after the career of Shamgar, who beat off—or
assisted in warding off-the first Philistine irruption, presumably that of the
year 1190 B. c. The. date of the battle of Taanach will then fall between about
1180 and 1170 or a little later, when the successful invasion occurred, al'ter the
death of Barneses III.; see the fuller discussion in Jour. Pal. Or. SocVol. I.,

ALBRIGHT: The Earliest Forms of Hebre٦٨r Verse
Curse ye Meron, saith--------
For they would not come
To the help of Yahweh,
Blest above women is Jael,
Water he asked,
In a lordly bowl
i One hand she put to the tent-pin
She struck down Sisera,
At her feet he bowed,
At her feet he bowed,
rOut from the window there looked
،،Why does his chariot
Why linger the hoofs
The wisest of her women replies —
،،Are they not finding
A maiden or two
Dyed Ù¡vork for Sisera
Eternally curse ye its people,
To the help of Yahweh,
Sending their warriors.
Above Ù¦vomen in tents is she blest.
She gave him milk,
She brought him cream.
Her right to the workman’s mallet;
She crushed his head,
He fell, he lay,
He fell, outstretched.
And wailed Sisera’s mother:
Tarry in coming?
Of his chariot-steeds?”
She, too, echoes her words:
And dividing the spoil? —
As spoil for each warrior,
Dyed and embroidered.”
In its present form, the poem is unmistakably a torso, but we
should perhaps be grateful for the fact that our copy closes at so
dramatic a point, sparing us, it may be, a weaker ending, an anti-
climax. The present ending is formed by a very weak and awkward
distich, evidently of liturgical origin:
Thus may all perish Of Thy foes, Yahweh,
While Thy friends be as the rise Of the sun in his strength.
It must be emphasized that the preceding arrangement of the
poem has not been reached as a result of any a priori theory, but
that it simply imposes itself upon the reader who knows what to
expect in ancient verse-forms. It is highly probable that it was
recited antiphonally, one chanting the hexameter, and another or a
chorus singing the following tristich. This is indicated by the fact
that the hexameter line always stands apart, having no direct
connection with the preceding strophe, and Only a loose one with the
following tristich, which it introduces. Thus stanzas V, XI, and XII
each contain an introduction, followed by a direct quotation. As is
well known, this antiphonal chanting and singing was a very common
practise in Babylonia as well as in Israel.

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
If there are still any doubts regarding tlie general correctness of
our results they should be removed by a carefill comparison of the
Lament of David over Jonathan, the only other early Israelite poem
of this type now extant. While the text of this poem, is more corrupt,
like the text of Samuel in general, the dominant sti-ucture is again
unquestionably the tetrameter tristicli, like the Song of Deborah.
The introductory hexameter appears as a refrain, following the
tristich instead of preceding it, but the same elements exactly are
used to form the strophe, and the character of the hexameter verse
is made cei'tain by the fact that it is a refrain, and hence certainly
antiphonal or choral. We have also echoes of the old climactic
parallelism, now falling into disuse.
د»م؛١١ i[]1٦O؛٣N 20 »ي٦لج1٦١ حب٦ل
دب٦٦ل ةض١ه run؟»n 1٥
ا؟ا ٦لرلجاد٦ دد„ ٦احل٦ج١ه
21 ٦١٦٣٦دح٩جحل2
»ب(„م ٥<5
د٢١ه دج
(٦مئ١٦ 3(ni٥١٦n
5>K١-٦tp٥ حلب١بع []4
هدأ دد١٦٦ه
د؛'•«’؟„ دم
22 ٥٦٥ 5n?؛n١ ه5٢٦ت ددالآلاه
?¡عثع٦ل ٦٦١د٦ممأ ةخ-دب١د ٦١HK
ا٦0د الآ 5»ا١مئ١د ١٦؟٥î
ى»اب ٦١١ااد٦لأ
٥٠٦١١٢٥ (n؟I٦ ?)
هدى١٦ه ?¡ا5ا
()د»„د١ه ()د?ل١؟ه5
٦ده١٦بمه <5»"دة٦٦ا
W٦N٥ دب٦ا
1 If the د١،٦لا١١ك of ٠ is original, we must have here a line 3 3؛ ;it is then
possible that the line which we have considered the second verse of the second
strophe is also 3-1-3 and introduces the strophe, just as in the Song of Deborah.
It is safe to say that the original structure of the poem was more complicated
than it now appears to be, as well as more formally perfect.
2 n is here, grammatically and logically impossible, while the substitution of
a ،٦ for the د gives a perfectly idiomatic and exact phrase.
‘٦ The hemistich should evidently be transposed from its place in I after the
next line.
4 Of. preceding note, as well as note on the first line of the, poem.
5 The articles are wholly superfluous, and hurt the rhythm 'appreciably.

8Ù 5
ALBRIGHT: The -Earliest I onus oi' Hebrew Verse
24 حب٦١مم
2[]rny٥،٦ بد١ىبأ
25 »٦١ ده?،١ دد١٦١ه
(رل)بئ»١<؛ حب١د٦،
ع؟ب١ ()هحل٦د١ها
د٦ل٦١ ٦لهب٢ه٠٦
زلأدلا 0١مل]3
26 لا٦ي١ حل?€٦١
درله٦لي١ ه»٦ت]
27 »٦١ دد٦۶ دد١٦□
حتبحى٦٦ل4٦٠١ H?)?،
»^١ ١،٦١د٢١أ
ئ»٦،ب٦ل د١٣ه
٩٦»د١٦ د١5 هيب٦إ
Proclaim it not in Ashkelon,
The Philistine maidens,
The heathen girls.
ØŸTell it not in Gath
Lest they rejoice,
Lest they exult,
And lofty uplands,
Nor rain upon you,
The warrior’s shield,
With oil unanointed.
Ye hills of Gilboa,
Let there be nor dew
For there was disgraced
The shield of Saul,
From the blood of the slain,
The bow of Jonathan
Nor the sword of Saul
From the entrails of warriors,
Never retreated, Ù 
Returned empty.
1| has حل٦د١ه □V اعىد١ “scarlet with delights,” but the omission of حل gives a
logical and idiomatic text.
2 ٠ offers هحلا؛٦ل, which is here impossible. After the corruption, in order
to ]preserve an intelligible text, it became necessary to transpose the following
3 The ١،٦١د٦لأ of I does not really belong in tlie text, but in the margin, as
explanation of the expression “gazelle of Israel.” Fortunately, this line was
employed as a title for the poem, and hence has been preserved intact, save for
an impossible article, at the beginning.
4 This foot should probably be scanned l 2 3 4 5al-bmoteka. In the genuine folk
vei’se of modern Palestine (see my note to Stephan’s papei’ in Jour. Pal. Or. Soc
Vol. II) long vowels may be treated as short at any time for the sake of the
metre. In Hebrew this tendency was probably not marked, but the “Aramaizing”
inclination to eliminate short unaccented vowels in open syllables certainly existedØ›
the Masoretic vocalization represents a learned reaction (cf. above).
5 دهض٦، ٠ه٠٦د١ئ٦ ؛١ ,٠, is clearly a prosaic gloss, explaining tlie beautiful line
whose cadence it so rudely interrupts.

Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
Saul and Jonathan,
In life they were comrades (?)
Swifter they than eagles,
Beloved, delightful,
In death were not parted.
Stronger than lions.
0 maidens of Israel,
Ù¡Vho was wont to clothe you
Who decked your garments
How have the warriors fallen
Weep ye for Saul,
In elegant scarlet,
With golden adornments!
In the midst of the battle!
The gazelle of Israel
I grieve for thee,
Far sweeter wast thou
How have the warriors fallen
Is slain on thy heights (Gilboa) -
My brother Jonathan,
Than the love of women.
And the weapons of war been lost!
We have thus seen that the Song of Deborah and, to a lesser
extent, the Lament of David over Jonathan represent what must
have been once an important category of Canaanite and Israelite
verse, written in the language of Canaan, and influenced by the
models which had governed the writing of verse in the literary centres
of the ancient Orient some centuries previously. The post-Davidic
poetry of the Old Testament is influenced by late Assyrian and
Babylonian models, which passed into Israel from Syria and Phoenicia,
where both Phoenicians and Aramaeans were always powerfully
affected by Mesopotamian cult and literature. In the Old Testament
we also have fragments of a different kind, without a literary back-
ground. Of this nature is the Bedu poem known as the Song of
Lamech, written in two couplets, one 2 + 2, the other 33Ø›, with a
rhyme in i which has always been characteristic of the nomad Arabs.
The triumphal song of Sihon, Num. 2127ff., does not lend itself to
successful reconstruction, but the metre is clearly 3 + 3, and at least
four of the seven lines—perhaps five — end with on, showing again
the Bedu origin of the song. The Song of the Well, Num. 21 17—18,
can almost be duplicated in Moab today. But the literary poetry
of Israel does not owe its beauty to Bedu models, but to the fact
that it Ù¦vas able to clothe the formally elegant models of the ancient
Orient with a spontaneous and freshly exuberant life.

CAPHARNAÜM, toi qui te dresses jusqu’au ciel tu seras abaissée
jusqu’aux enfers!» Voilà le triste adieu que Jésus fit à sa seconde
patrie à la veill١e de la quitter pour toujours. Pour ceux qui connaissent
la position privilégiée qu’occupait Càpharnaüm à l’avènement du N.T.,
ces mots de l’Evangile sont parfaitement intelligibles, quand on par-
court (à 19 siècles de distance) le vaste champ, où sont encore
enterrées la plupart de ses ruines.
Ville de passage et de marché international, Oapharnaüm était
au centre même du mouvement des caravanes, entre la plaine
d’Esdrelon, Scythopolis et Damas. Elle possédait en outre, un port
qui l’enrichissait de son transit particulier. Les mariniers du lac y
déchargeaient-le blé du Hauran pour les exportations de Tyr, Sidon
et Césarée: mouvement des plus actifs encore, puisqu’il contribuait
au ravitaillement de Rome et de l’Italie. Ce ne sont pas seulement
les Juifs qui viendront là pour entendre Jésus: mais des Iduméens,
des Tyriens, des Sidoniens et des gens de la Transjordane, attirés
par un commerce lucratif. Rien d’extraordinaire donc, si Oapharnaüm
était devenue, au commencement du premier siècle de notre ère, une
ville opulente et riche, digne de posséder la plus belle des synagogues
connues en Galilée et dont nous venons de mettre à jour les derniers
Hélas! cette période de prospérité ne semble avoir été que de
trop courte durée, puisque trente ans plus tard (66—67 après J.-C.)
elle était déchue au rang d’une simple bourgade, ٩٩ dans laquelle
!’Historien juif se fit transporter pour recevoir les premiers soins de

88 Journal of tl e Palestine Oriental Society
ses blessures, à la suite de la bataille engage ente lui et Sylla,
commandant des troupes d’Agrippa II. (Jos. Vita, 72. ed, Dindorf.).
Ici, une première question se pose: à quoi devons٠nous attribuer
la décadence si rapide de Capharnaum? !histoire est muette à ce
sujet: mais nous croyons pouvoir l’attribuer à plusieurs causes, qui
y auront contribue egalement. Peut-être, les tremblements de terre,
(phénomène assez commun dans le bassin du lac de Tibériade).
L’histoire nous a conservé le souvenir des nombreux tremblements
de terre, qui ont ébranle le sol de l’Asie entre l’an 60 et 70 après J.٠c٠:
Colosses et Laodicée furent détruites en l’an 6(), sans parler de
Philadelphie, qui mérita le titre de «ville pleine de tremblements de
terre» (Strabon XIII, 10).
Un autre phénomène d’ordre social aura^galement privé Capharnatim
d’un bon nombre de ses citoyens adoptifs et hotes momentanés: je
veux parler du développement rapide d’une puissante rivale, Tibériade,
devenue capitale de la Galilée, située elle aussi, sur une des ramifica-
tions du grand réseau de routes coinmerciales entre Damas, la Phénicie
et l’Egypte. Rien d’invraisemblable: d’autant plus que le roi Antipas
fut très large en faveurs et en privilèges envers les nouveaux habitants
de sa capitale, qu’il dut recruter principalement entre l’élément payen,
puisque les bons Israélites s’interdisaient d’habiter Tibériade, et meme
d’y passer. (Talmud de Jérusalem, Schebuth IX, 1.)
Mais ce qui joua un role plus néfaste dans la décadence de
Capharnaum, ce fut la corruption des mœurs de ses habitants,
alimentée par la convoitise des richesses et les abus du luxe. Jésus
avait dit que Capharnaum et ses deux voisines Bethsa'ida et Coroza'in
s’obstinaient dans le vice plus durement que Sodome, Tyr et Sidon:
et, à quelques siècles de distance, le Talmud nous confirme que chez
les habitants de Capharnaum l’immoralité était très avance
Le Midrash JKoheleth (7,20 fol. 14,2) cite les paroles de l’Ecclésiaste
VII, 26, où il est dit de la femme au cœur léger: ((Celui qui est
agréable à Dieu lui. échappe: mais le pécheur sera pris par elle),,
puis il ajoute: «Cela vise les'gens de Kefar-Nahum».
Plus loin, le meme Midrasch (fol. 109, 4) parlant de Hanania
neveu du célébré Rabbi Jehosoua, qui habitait Capharnaum dans la
prémière moitié du II٥ siècle, dit: «Hanania, le neveu de Rabbi
Jehosoua, fut un saint homme: par contre les habitants de Kefar-
Nahum sont des pécheurs».