Origin and evolution of South Arabian minuscule writing on wood (1)

Arab. arch. epig. 2001: 12: 223–235 Printed in Denmark. All rights reserved

Copyright C Munksgaard 2001

ISSN 0905-7196

Origin and evolution of South Arabian minuscule writing on wood (1) J. RYCKMANS Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium Introduction In several unpublished lectures delivered in the early 1970s the late Mahmoud Ghul (Univ. of Yarmouk, Irbid, Jordan) described two cylindrical wooden sticks from Yemen, finely incised with a then unknown type of writing. On the basis of a partial decipherment Ghul identified this as a form of handwriting derived from the monumental inscriptions of pre-Islamic South Arabia (2). It was not until late 1977, nearly 140 years after the decipherment of monumental South Arabian writing, that Ghul successfully concluded his decipherment of the minuscule script and that the scholarly world became fully aware of the nature of this writing as the device which was substituted in daily life during the pre-Islamic era (and even in the Islamic era) (3) for monumental writing on stone. The writing style of the two sticks studied by Ghul is clearly that of a minuscule form of writing, i.e. writing in which the ‘body’ of the letter is extended to different heights by a stem or a loop, as in a musical stave, and which is to monumental writing what ‘script’ or ‘running writing’ is to printed text. One should not, however, speak of the writing as ‘cursive’. Certainly the writing of the texts on wood is cursive, to the extent that this signifies ‘all writing representing a rapid form of a slower form of writing’ (4). Nevertheless, the word ‘cur-

sive’ is already used to describe various epigraphic scripts written on rock faces in pre-Islamic Arabia which have no relation to the writing in question here. Moreover, the Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English specifies that, in speaking of writing, the word ‘cursive’ indicates that it is ‘done with joined characters’ (5). In fact, in none of the known examples are the letters, however closely written together, ever joined. The English definition of cursive seems to have European minuscule handwriting in mind even though, not without some ambiguity, certain Anglophone scholars use the term ‘cursive’ in the sense of ‘informal’ to designate Semitic writings such as early Hebrew or Phoenician in which all of the letters are separate. In 1983 additional texts on wood, originating from clandestine excavations, began appearing in the su¯qs of Sw anca¯’. These included both segments of wooden branches like the Ghul texts as well as, for the first time, palm-leaf stalks or ‘ribs’. The discovery of such texts, which we now know are generally earlier than the cylindrical wooden sticks of the type studied by Ghul, confirmed the Arabic tradition according to which palm-leaf stalks (Ar. pl. c usub al-nah8 l) were used in pre-Islamic Yemen for a type of writing called zabu¯r, as distinct from the monumental epigraphic South Arabian script which was called

223

J. RYCKMANS musnad (6). In 1985 a dozen inscribed sticks and palm-stalks (some of which belonged to the Museum of Antiquities of the University of Sw anca¯’), were entrusted to Walter W. Müller of the Seminar für Semitistik, Marburg University. These were studied jointly by W.W. Müller, Yusuf M. Abdallah of the University of Sw anca¯’ and the present writer (7). The same team was invited in 1991 to Sw anca¯’ to study an additional forty palmstalk texts which had been acquired by the National Museum of Yemen thanks to a grant from Total-Yemen and the Indo-Suez Bank. This study led to a publication in 1994 which concentrated on sixteen of the best preserved pieces in the collection (8). Already in 1990 a palm-stalk excavated by the Soviet-Yemeni expedition at Raybu¯n had been published, which bore a text incised in a variant of the monumental script which could be considered transitional between the monumental and the written minuscule variety (9). In 1992 a further dozen inscribed palm-stalks were entrusted for study to the author by several anonymous collectors. Two of these texts, displaying transitional letter forms, were subsequently published (10). With the exception of those texts considered transitional between the monumental and the minuscule forms of writing which might provisionally be dated to the fourth-second centuries BC, the texts mentioned, studied and in part published then would seem, judging by several criteria, to date to between the first century BC and the third century AD (11). In September, 1994, the Board of the Oosters Instituut (Oriental Institute), a private foundation in Leiden, decided to put to good use its important collection of texts on wood by commissioning A.J. Drewes (Univ. of Leiden) and the present writer to study and publish them. The c.300 texts, along with those texts already published or

224

known, were copied in facsimile (J. Ryckmans), transliterated and registered (A. J. Drewes), word for word with context in a computer database. The simple act of making an inventory of the collection revealed the presence, in a significant number of cases, of texts written in what is considered the most ancient style of monumental epigraphic South Arabian, thus confirming what had been, until our work was undertaken, merely a rumour that such was the case. Another surprise was the rich diversity of letter forms which reflects the progressive disintegration of the monumental writing style, the birth of the minuscule mode of writing and its subsequent evolution, as successive stages emerged in a manner which, although irreversible, was nevertheless characterised by the variable pace of evolution for each letter. The totality of texts to which we have had access thus allows us to establish a fairly secure relative chronology from the earliest documents dating roughly to the seventh century BC (12) down to, at the very least, the year 380 AD which corresponds more or less to the year 495 in the local era used in text Leiden 25 (13), although certain letter forms in similar texts appear to be even later. The present article aims to examine the evolution and development of the South Arabian minuscule writing system. Attested for more than a millennium and derived originally from the monumental epigraphic script, minuscule writing evolved after its emergence as an autonomous graphic system. The South Arabian minuscule tradition is of exceptional interest in relation to the broader history of the evolution of the Semitic alphabets. So far as we know, South Arabian minuscule writing was used almost exclusively on wood. It is only rarely used on any other medium, such as stone, bronze or terracotta (14), even if one might have expected to see it

SOUTH ARABIAN MINUSCULE WRITING ON WOOD used for graffiti on rock faces. The reason for this almost exclusive use lies perhaps in the fact that it was a form of ‘rapid writing’. The documentation used for the present article consists of over 150 texts from the collections mentioned above which the author has copied from the original sources and deciphered in collaboration with W.W. Müller, Y.M. Abdallah, A.G. Lundin and, for more than 100 of those texts, A.J. Drewes. More than seventy graphically variant texts have been chosen. In each case the same twenty letters have been used, selected among others because they show a greater variation in the course of their evolution. The elimination of duplicates and of examples which are deficient

in one respect or another has resulted in some fifty variant forms, illustrated in Figs. 1–4. The individual letters have been drawn from tracings made of photographs, adjusted in the case of the Leiden and X.JRy texts, after a further scrutiny of the original documents and the corresponding photographs. The letter forms in the figures accompanied by a simple number are those drawn from copies made from original documents in 1985 which could not later be re-examined, with the exception of texts No. 7 and No. 8, in which several letters could be collated on the basis of subsequently published, fragmentary photographs (15). The classification of the graphic variants has made it possible to distinguish a series

Fig. 1. Stage I: Musnad; Stage II, Transition: Phases IIa-IId.

225

J. RYCKMANS of stages and phases in the evolution of this writing system. In the absence of absolute chronological fixed points and with regard to the independent evolution of the minuscule vs. the monumental script, it is impossible to determine the duration of each of the graphic phases described below. Unfortunately, none of the reigns mentioned in the minuscule texts can be dated with precision and the rare cases of eponyms mentioned in them are either unattested elsewhere or else not yet dated with certainty.

Stages in the development of the South Arabian minuscule script Stage I Stage I (Fig. 1) is characterised by musnad writing, i.e. the style of monumental script in a very early form which could be called pre-classical because of its lack of regularity, verticality, rigorous symmetry and definition of forms as known in classical, monumental script. Among the most characteristic forms are the double-angled la¯m, attested also in certain stages of Lihyanite writing (16) and in South Arabian graffiti 6 and 9 from al-Durayb Yala¯’. The eyelets of the letters cayn, sw a¯d and wa¯w are often made of a poorly formed, horizontally elongated oval. The two ovals of d ta¯’ are placed one above the other without a vertical bar between them. The oval in sw a¯d rests on three steep legs which fan out (cf. al-Durayb-Yala¯’ 18). The lower legs of the letters alif, ka¯f and sı¯n angle inwards, as in Lihyanite. Leiden 37 (17), a complete alphabet primer (the reverse bears the beginning of a second alphabet primer which was left incomplete), is one of the very ancient texts which belong to Stage I. The letters are arranged in the now well-known South Arabian letter order, with one previously unattested inversion: final d-z-y-t-zw in place of

226

z-d etc. One characteristic of this writing stage, which one finds in other examples as well, is that the V-form of the upper branches of ha¯’ and of the ‘trident’ of hw a¯’ is not extended by a vertical stem. This can be seen in al-Durayb Yala¯’ 18 and 21, as well as on the incised palm-leaf stem from Raybu¯n (see n. 9). On the other hand, the da¯l and the qa¯f in this stage appear in the normal form found in the monumental inscriptions. One unique text (Leiden 76, stage I), in which only twelve letters of the alphabet are attested, shows that when employed on wood the monumental South Arabian script was more highly evolved and ‘classical’ than that seen in the previously mentioned alphabet primer. But this later form does not seem to have influenced the subsequent development of writing on wood. The form of the ha¯’ in Leiden 76 – a small, rounded half-oval atop a vertical stroke – does not appear in later minuscule versions of this letter, the shape of which derives from the V-topped version mentioned above.

Stage II Stage II (Fig. 1) is still characterised by a monumental style of script. This is a transitional stage rich in variants which precedes the birth of true minuscule writing. Four phases illustrate the progressive disintegration and dismemberment of the monumental script, as certain forms are replaced by others, some of which appear for the first time. The double-angled la¯m remains well represented during the entire stage. A phase IIa may be distinguished from Stage I by the final disappearance of the monumental style mı¯m which was replaced by various forms, some of which recall the Lihyanite mı¯m. The former vertical back of the letter becomes rounded or angular, al-

SOUTH ARABIAN MINUSCULE WRITING ON WOOD most boomerang-shaped. This recalls the mı¯m found in rock inscriptions in North Arabia as well as the graffiti at al-Durayb Yala¯’ (e.g. 4, 12, 14 and 18). The fa¯’ assumes a plano-convex form (the flat side on the left), also attested in al-Durayb Yala¯’ 12. In this phase the eyelets in some letters are written in ill-adjusted strokes. The ha¯’ retains its V without a stem and the alif remains topped by a double angle as in the monumental script (an alif topped by two small vertical stems, common in Lihyanite and many North Arabian rock inscriptions, is never attested in the texts on wood). A phase IIb is represented by a single inscription (Leiden 14) (18) which may be considered Minaean in view of its very clear links to the Lihyanite writing style with its angular, bent and ‘dismembered’ letters, such as the tw a¯’. In this phase the alif loses its right angles and has a simplified ‘antenna’. The bars of the da¯l become dismantled (as in phase IIc). The loop of the ya¯’ becomes extended into a triangle shape on the right side of the stem, as seen in alDurayb Yala’ 1, 2 and 12. The hw a¯’ has still the early, angular shape as well as a variant with a stem, perhaps influenced by the monumental style as seen in Leiden 76 (phase I). The ha¯’ has a particular shape (cf. al-Durayb Yala’ 11) which is otherwise attested only in phase IVa and which can be compared with a capital Y but with a lower slanted stroke as in the small letter y. The qa¯f of Leiden 14 still reflects the monumental form of the letter but its appendages, instead of being vertical, are both slanted towards the right. Interestingly a variant of the same letter, in which the upper appendage is slanted towards the right while the lower one remains vertical, is well attested in both early and late monumental Lihyanite. Phase IIc shares a number of characteristics with IIb, particularly the form of the letters da¯l, wa¯w and ya¯’. Two texts may be

assigned to this phase. The first one is a special case (see n. 14); it is a short inscription incised on a terracotta incense burner in the Yemen Museum which comes from the temple of Wadd du¯Masma‘im, at the foot of Jabal Balaq al-Qiblı¯ in the Ma¯rib region (unlike all of the texts on wood examined here which are thought to come from al-Sawda¯’ in the Jawf of northern Yemen). The second text is published: X.JRy b-2 (see n. 10). Both texts still use the monumental type of da¯l, but a new type of ha¯’ appears which becomes common during phase IId and is characterised by a vertical stem in the middle of which a slightly curved branch runs off to the right at a 45æ angle. The nu¯n shows a very stylised form in which the angle in this letter almost disappears. Phase IId is the most significant in the entire evolution of this stage. It is characterised by a new form of da¯l and a previously unattested form of qa¯f which is virtually exclusive to this phase. The qa¯f, which we have called ‘ephemeral’, has no parallel in any other writing system in Arabia. It shows a vertical stem, from the middle of which a sort of oblique zig-zag runs off upwards to the right. It is possible to trace this form, by a process of lateral displacement, to the qa¯f of phase IIb but to date no intermediate forms are attested and, furthermore, this would not explain the later exclusive appearance of a form of qa¯f related to the earlier style, nor the disappearance of the form by which it was superseded in phase IId. The da¯l of monumental type disappears for good after a final appearance in Leiden 140, where both the old and the new forms co-exist. The new form seems to be the result of the breaking down of the old form into two separate parts: the stem and the triangle, a phenomenon comparable to that which has affected virtually all forms of da¯l in Lihyanite inscriptions. If the chrono-

227

J. RYCKMANS logical sequence suggested here is correct, the detached triangle seems to have been first placed on the writing line (19), to the left of the stem (e.g. in Leiden 153), but it later assumed a different position on a second stem. There it appears at the top and on the right side of the stem like a small loop. Together the two segments of the da¯l resemble the letter combination PI written in capitals. As will be seen below, the subsequent forms of da¯l are important markers in defining the later stages in the evolution of minuscule writing. The monumental type of da¯l also makes a last appearance (Leiden 153) in phase IId and is replaced in subsequent phases by a series of very degraded variants. The bars of this letter (still visible in phases IIc and IId) give way to a loop or triangle attached to the bottom right of the left-hand of two vertical stems. Taken together the elements of this letter resemble the Russian letter ery, which one can represent in Latin script by the letter combination bI (small b π capital I). The loop is sometimes replaced by a small vertical stem running upwards from a horizontal line joining the two larger, vertical ones (which may deviate obliquely towards the top). The double-angled la¯m makes its last appearances, after which it is replaced by a triangular form resting on the writing line which risks confusion with a ba¯’, tipped obliquely. The hw a¯’ shows the form first seen in phase IIc. The hw a¯’ with central stem becomes the norm. Three texts show a curious form of the za¯y (which occurs once in phase IIIa as well) combining two chevrons sideways, one written over the other. The last examples of the letter zw a¯’ also occur in this phase. We know that the etymological /zw /, represented by a distinct sign in the monumental inscriptions, is rendered by dw a¯d in the minuscule texts known to date. The alif of this phase has finally lost all of the angularity of the

228

earlier, monumental style alif. Finally, the top of the stem of the ya¯’ is bent, a trait which will eventually distinguish this letter from similar minuscule letters of the series c/b/l/y. The provisional, chronological assignment of the texts of phase IId is based on the persistence of several of the earlier angular forms (e.g. a sw a¯d very similar to the sw a¯d of the Lihyanite inscriptions and al-Durayb Yala¯’ 18). At the same time the attribution of three texts to the end of this phase is based on the presence of elements which characterise minuscule writing, such as the horizontal appendage on the writing line at the end of a letter e.g. in the case of the wa¯w, which is very similar to its true minuscule counterpart, and the generally relaxed, supple nature of the letters. The latest text assigned to this phase (Leiden 11, unpubl.) is inscribed in very small letters, even though they cannot yet be called minuscule. It seems that it was specifically this diminution in the size of written letters, suitable for rapid forms of writing which led to the emergence of the minuscule script (20), the stems and tails of which served to maintain legibility, which might otherwise have been lost in the process.

Stage III Stage III (Fig. 2) represents true minuscule writing, the evolution of which is marked by a succession of variants in the form of da¯l (see upper left hand corner of Figs. 2– 4). In general the letters of this stage are smaller and more angled than their predecessors. The stems are elongated or new stems appear (fa¯’, tw a¯’), many of the ends of letters extend like a horizontal appendage, and most of the forms have rounded or softened shapes. An initial phase IIIa is characterised firstly by a new form of da¯l, consisting of an elongated and angled stem ending in a

SOUTH ARABIAN MINUSCULE WRITING ON WOOD

Fig. 2. Stage III: Minuscule; Phases IIIa-IIIb Problems.

short, horizontal stroke separated from a small triangle with a slight extension to the left along the writing line, and a qa¯f which regains for good a form derived directly from the monumental type of qa¯f. The qa¯f is made up of two strokes, a right-hand one ending in a semi-circle open on the left, and another one shaped like a reverse comma, to the left, which extends downward. A stylised variant of this letter, reminiscent of a double vertical zig-zag, appears in phase IIIa and later on as well. The da¯l occurs in several forms (some of which were attested earlier) which appear indiscriminately and are distinguished from one another by the way in which the open loop of the earlier forms is rendered. This is either a small stroke or a curve open to the left, between two vertical lines. Most often the loop is formed by a rounded stroke which opens at the bottom towards the left. The hollow thereby formed may be closed by another small stroke, or the bottom of the second vertical stroke may end in a curve opening towards the left.

A new, V-shaped ha¯’ appears, the base of which resembles either a knot or a small, horizontal stroke curving upward towards the left. In some cases the left side of the V extends below the right side, and may turn back towards the left (e.g. X.JRy b-6) making the letter resemble a ‘square’ Hebrew sw a¯deh. The tines of the ‘fork’ of hw a¯’ exhibit a number of variants. At first they appear detached like apostrophes on either side of the vertical stroke (cf. ‘l’), though not necessarily at precisely the same height. Later they appear like two small circles flanking the top of the vertical stem æ|æ. These circles may be open at the bottom, giving the entire letter the appearance of an open umbrella in profile. Often this latter form can only be differentiated from a wa¯w by the length of its central stem. The letters cayn, ba¯’, la¯m and ya¯’ all have similar shapes: a rounded or triangular loop ending with a slight extension towards the left. Generally the cayn is small and angular, and after a divider, it can often be confused with the second half of a

229

J. RYCKMANS da¯l; the ba¯’ is large, rounded and a bit taller; the la¯m shows a small, rounded loop with a long stem; and the ya¯’ has an angular loop and vertical stem which bends near the top. Having said this, all of these traits are susceptible to alteration by individual scribes, and discriminating between these four letters is a recurrent problem in dealing with the texts. The same applies, although somewhat less so, to the alif, ka¯f and sı¯n. To the letter forms for this phase illustrated in the figures should be added those of text X.JRy-c (21). Without suggesting that it has any chronological significance, we have given the name phase IIIb to a hybrid writing style which shows characteristics of both IIb and IIIa, but which appears to be later. This seems to be derived from that of Leiden 33 (Minaean, phase IId) and is characterised by an alif with a horizontal ‘antenna’ and a very stylised nu¯n. Apart from the minuscule da¯l, the writing of phase IIIb is still done in capital letters. Given their rounded forms the letters of this phase could be termed uncial. Most letters are extended by a horizontal appendage typical of minuscule writing. There are two main varieties of this writing style, both represented in stage IIIb Problems. The earlier one, rarely attested, is exemplified by the damaged text Leiden 107. The other, very similar to the older one, is represented by Leiden 9, 12 and 149 (the last one not illustrated). Both varieties exhibit a da¯l with two parallel stems (cf. one of the forms of da¯l of phase IVb), a fa¯’ with a short stem, a la¯m formed by an isolated stem followed by an oblique line; a mı¯m composed of a curved, angled stem to which a semi-circle is attached on the right (cf. the fa¯’ of stages III and IV). The ta¯’ is very angled and angular, its upper loop transformed into a ‘fork’ as in stage IVa-b. The lower loop of this letter is also open, so that the whole form resembles an italicised

230

capital H with an appendix at the bottom left. Apart from having a qa¯f of a type already seen in IId, Leiden 107 is notable for its rare type of wa¯w: a vertical ovoid, from the centre of which, on the left side, a short line runs obliquely down to the left. The three other texts belonging to this phase share a g˙ayn which is exclusive to this phase and which recalls a wa¯w, though more angular and topped by a small vertical stem (22). In addition, they have a hw a¯’ showing the usual trident form, sometimes with the tines separated from the vertical stem. The la¯m of this phase is easily confused with the sı¯n of the same phase, while the qa¯f consists of a double zig-zag already attested in phase IIIa. Leiden 9 is unusually large, 40.4 cm long, with eleven lines of writing. The writing on this text and on Leiden 12 and 149 is characterised by large, supple capitals which are compact, but not linked, and difficult to read, suggestive of ceremonial writing, as for example chancellery writing (23). Alongside certain archaic traits the writing of this phase contains letter forms which occur nowhere else, or if so, with a completely different value (!) in the later stages of minuscule writing. The survival of this kind of writing, somewhat apart from the main trends seen in the evolution of minuscule script, might be explained by the closed nature of the particular scribal school which used it. This is another reason why texts 9, 12 and 149 appear to be older than they actually are. In fact, along with the texts on wood Leiden 25 and 138 (the latter not illustrated) and the palm texts Leiden 302 and 312, both of which belong to phase IVb, Leiden 9, 12 and 149 are the only texts on wood known to date (1998) which contain a word for the root ‘three’ in the late orthography tlt. The latest text which contains the earlier forms s˘lt (the contract concerning ‘Three sheep’ (24)), with the da¯l formed by two stems with an

SOUTH ARABIAN MINUSCULE WRITING ON WOOD isolated element still well drawn, belongs to phase IVa. The texts described above would thus belong to phase IVb, whatever the exact point of the change in the root for ‘three’ in the minuscule texts may have been. Another problem concerns the texts which belong to phases IId through IIIb. What is the significance of the appearance in phase IId of the qa¯f derived from the monumental form which is replaced before the end of the phase by a previously unattested form which subsequently disappears completely? It doesn’t seem likely that the form really went out of favour, but perhaps the appearance of a new form resulted from an external influence coinciding with the appearance of the new type of da¯l. As we have seen, this new form of da¯l shows similarities with the Lihyanite da¯l. Could

the influence have come from that direction? An indication of the source of the influence is provided by the fact that, of the eight texts known at this time and assigned to phases IId and IIIb which show the later type of qa¯f and the new type of da¯l, five are certainly Minaean (marked M) while one is Sabaean (Leiden 107). The language of the other two texts assigned to this group cannot be determined since they are simple alphabet primers (marked by an asterisk *), but one might suggest, given the large number of Minaean alphabet primers, that they might well be Minaean as well. Thus, bearing in mind the limited evidence before us, one might suggest that the new types of qa¯f and da¯l were introduced from the north (?) into or from a Minaean cultural milieu, particularly in view of the extensive north-south distribution of

Fig. 3. Stage IVa: Minuscule; Phase IVa.

231

J. RYCKMANS

Fig. 4. Stage IVb: Minuscule; Phase IVb.

Minaean culture in the western Arabian peninsula. Of the two letters in question, only the new da¯l later enjoyed a place in the minuscule tradition. The ephemeral qa¯f does not seem to have survived the end of Minaean hegemony.

Stage IV Stage IV (Figs. 3 & 4) is the best attested of all in the corpus. An initial phase IVa is characterised by a new type of da¯l consisting of two strokes, one long and generally vertical, and another one shorter and more oblique, with the separate element marked by an appendage. This separate item may appear as one or two short, vertical strokes, or one or two dots. This phase is also characterised by the appearance of cylindrical segments of wood of various types alongside the palm leaf stalks. They include examples of both dense wood,

232

such as the two pieces deciphered by Ghul, as well as light wood characterised by a large central medullary canal, the marrow of which has generally disappeared, creating a tube-like effect. The wooden sticks are marked in the figures by a bold dot ( . ). A particular form of ha¯’ (already attested in phase IId) is well established during this period. It is marked by a long, oblique curving stem running from the top right towards the bottom left, in the middle of which is a vertical or oblique line. The letter thus resembles our printed small y written as a capital. We also see the use of forms previously attested for the letters da¯l, ha¯’, ta¯’, tw a¯’ and mı¯m. For the last time the mı¯m shows the trace of the typical reflex angle of its monumental ancestor but two new versions of this letter (seen together in texts TYA 12 and No. 8) appear as well. One is crescent-shaped like our capital D, while the other one, which became stan-

SOUTH ARABIAN MINUSCULE WRITING ON WOOD dard, is formed of a small acute angle, opened towards the left, and closed on the left by a curve descending towards the right. Thus this letter resembles our printed small e. Some examples of the series alif/ka¯f/sı¯n and occasionally sw a¯d appear to be stretched out vertically as a result of the elongation of their final stroke. The ka¯f (Leiden 26) and later the alif (‘No. 11’) are distinguished by the new way in which their ‘antenna’ branches off the middle of the diagonal stroke in the middle of the letter. The curved ‘pocket’ of the sı¯n may be opened on the left, resembling the form of the qa¯f. The nu¯n is attested in various forms but there is now a tendency for the join between the upper ‘antenna’ of the letter and the lower curve to meet at an acute angle, forming a fork with the body of the letter (see e.g. text ‘No. 11’). The g˙ ayn looks like our small k (e.g. in TYA 8 and the two Ghul texts) and this becomes the norm in the following phase. In phase IVb (Fig. 4) the da¯l is written with two parallel strokes, either curved towards the left at the bottom or joined at the base. In one variant (TYA 1) the bottom of the left-hand stroke bends out horizontally towards the left. The remarks made above concerning the series alif, ka¯f and sı¯n apply in this phase as well, although many examples of alif, and later ka¯f, take on a new form resembling both our capital N and an aleph in ‘square’ Hebrew writing. The da¯l is larger and in its most common form what was formerly a loop appears now as a bulge at the lower left of the second (left-hand) vertical stroke. In three examples (TYA 1 and 16; X.JRy b-4) the two parts of the letter qa¯f are noticeably far apart. The e-shaped mı¯m shows a tendency to be made smaller, and in the texts Leiden 72, 4, 101 and 77 this form alternates with another in which the upper angle of the letter is open towards the left, giving the

letter a strong resemblance to the Arabic letter hw a¯’ in its isolated position. Similarly in Leiden 4 and 101 the letter ya¯’ resembles an angular headed number 3. Five of the texts belonging to this phase are engraved on wooden sticks to which may be added a sixth, Leiden 138, not illustrated here. The text Leiden 25 gives us the only firm chronological indicator among all of the texts known thus far. It is dated as follows in lines 9–10: ‘its date (or: its month): du¯ Niswa[r] of the year 495 [...]’. This local date corresponds approximately to the year 380 AD. Among the texts assigned to this phase (for the most part according to the evolution of the alif) it is too difficult to say whether there are any which ought to post-date Leiden 25. An unpublished text X.JRy b-9, still only imperfectly deciphered (the writing is terribly ambiguous), seems to be just slightly later. It is marked by the almost complete absence of a terminal appendage on most letters, by a nu¯n formed out of a long vertical stroke, from the middle of which a short stroke runs off to the left creating an acute angle, and by a da¯l formed by two high ‘parentheses’ enclosing a short vertical stroke.

Conclusion The present study has attempted to outline a chronological and graphic catalogue of letters on wooden and palm texts, each within its respective alphabetical environment. It reflects the relative paucity of available texts, only a small portion of which are illustrated here, as well as the restricted number of photographs available from which reliable tracings of letter forms could be made. Within the aim of giving a broad introduction to the reading and decipherment of the texts on wood, particular attention has been paid in the notes to texts cited in previously published works with accompanying photographs and drawings.

233

J. RYCKMANS The evolutionary stages in the development of this written genre have been established in what is believed to be a chronological order. It is clear that with the appearance of additional texts it will be possible to refine the schema outlined here and possibly also to bring to light new chronological fixed points with which to anchor the proposed evolutionary sequence of writing on wood and palm as it developed in Southern Arabia. References 1. Revised text of an unpublished lecture presented at the Atelier Europe´en ‘Civilisations de l’Arabie pre´-islamique’, Aix-en-Provence, 1–3 March 1996 and at the Institut d’E´tudes Se´mitiques at the Colle`ge de France, 22 February 1999. 2. Tracing and transliteration of the characters of the two texts: Beeston AFL. Mahmoud ‘Ali Ghul and the Sabaean cursive script. In: Ibrahim MM, ed. Arabian studies in honour of Mahmoud Ghul: Symposium at Yarmouk University, December 8–11, 1984. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1989: 17 and Tables I– II. Tables of characters of the two texts and of four others: Ryckmans J. Pe´tioles de palmes et baˆtonnets inscrits: un type nouveau de documents du Ye´men antique. Bulletin de la Classe des Lettres et des Sciences morales et politiques de l’Acade´mie Royale de Belgique 4: 1993: 32; Fig. 25; Ryckmans J. Les deux baˆtonnets sud-arabes de´chiffre´s par Mahmoud Ghul. In: Gingrich A, Haas S, Paleczek G & Fillitz T, eds. Studies in Oriental culture and history: Festschrift for Walter Dostal. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1993: 41–48, Figs. I-II: tracing and transliteration of Ghul A and B; Pls. I and II: photographs of both texts; Robin CJ. L’Arabie antique de Karib’ıˆl a` Mahomet. Revue du monde musulman et de la Me´diterrane´e 61: 1992: 132–4, Figs. 30–1, photographs, tracing and transliteration of text Ghul B. 3. Schneider M. Un rapport en arabe sur un pe´tiole de palme originaire du Ye´men. Aula Orientalis 12: 1994: 193–210; Un second rapport en arabe sur un pe´tiole de palme originaire du Ye´men. Aula Orientalis 14: 1996: 55–78. 4. Rey A, ed. Le Petit Robert: Dictionnaire alphabe´tique et analogique de la langue franc¸aise, I. Paris: Dictionnaires Le Robert. 1979: 438, citing (without ref.) Marcel Cohen. 5. Sykes JB, ed. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English 1976: col. 2516.

234

6. Müller WW. L’e´criture zabu¯r du Ye´men pre´-islamique dans la tradition arabe. In: Ryckmans J, Müller WW & Abdallah YM. Textes du Ye´men antique inscrits sur bois. Louvain-la-Neuve: Publications de l’Institut Orientaliste de Louvain, 43: 1994: 35–9 (hereafter TYA); Abdallah YM. H8 atw tw alzabu¯r al-yama¯nı¯ walnuqu¯s˘ al-H8 as˘abiyya. TYA (Arabic section): 5–15. 7. The letter forms of a series of these texts have been studied and illustrated in tables: Ryckmans J. Une e´criture minuscule sud-arabe antique re´cemment de´couverte. In: Vanstiphout HLJ, Jongeling K, Leemhuis F & Reinink GJ, eds. Scripta Signa Vocis: Studies about scripts, scriptures, scribes and languages in the Near East presented to J.H. Hospers. Groningen: Egbert Forsten, 1986: 185–199, Figs. 198–9. 8. Ryckmans, Müller & Abdallah, TYA. Each text is published with photograph, tracing, transliteration and French and Arabic translation. 9. Bauer GM, Akopjan AM & Lundin AG. Novye epigrafic˘eskie pamjatniki iz Hadramauta. VDI 2: 1990: 168–73, text and tracing. Re-edited under the siglum X.RB-89, No. 7 in Frantsouzoff SA. Hadramitic documents written on palm-leaf stalks. PSAS 29: 1999: 55–65, with photographs and tracings. 10. The texts X.JRy b-1 (phase IIc) and 2 (phase IId). Edited by Ryckmans J. Pe´tioles de palmes et baˆtonnets sud-arabes inscrits: notes de pale´ographie. In: Nebes N, ed. Arabia Felix: Beiträge zur Sprache und Kultur des vorislamischen Arabien, Festschrift Walter W. Müller zum 60. Geburtstag. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994: 250–259. Table 259 gives for the text X.JRy b-2, col. g˙ayn, a sign later correctly identified as qa¯f by Ryckmans J & Loundine AG. Un pe´tiole de palme inscrit en mine´en. In: Stiegner R, ed. Aktualisierte Beiträge zum 1. Internationalen Symposion Südarabien interdisziplinär an der Universität Graz, mit kurzen Einführungen zu Sprache- und Kulturgeschichte in Memoriam Maria Höfner. Graz: Leikam, 1997: 171– 180. Transliteration, translation, photographs and tracing: 173–175 π errata. 11. Ryckmans, Pe´tioles de palmes: un type nouveau de documents: 25–26. 12. Ryckmans J. Un abe´ce´daire sud-arabe archaı¨que complet, grave´ sur un pe´tiole de palme. In: I primi sessanta anni di scuola: Studi dedicati a Sergio Noja Noseda nel suo 65æ anno compleanno, 7 luglio 1996. Lesa: Fondazione Ferni Noja Noseda, 1997: 11–36. The text published from a tracing (15, after a photograph) bears the siglum ‘Oost. Inst. Leiden 37’, abbreviated here as Leiden 37. 13. Unpublished text, the late writing style of which is shown here in Fig. 4, phase IVb.

SOUTH ARABIAN MINUSCULE WRITING ON WOOD 14. To the rare occurrences cited in Ryckmans, Une e´criture minuscule sud-arabe antique: 198–199, and Ryckmans, Pe´tioles de palmes: notes de pale´ographie 256–7, can be added, firstly: a terracotta incense burner in the Yemen Museum, inv. YM 2536, the writing style illustrated here in Fig. 1, phase IIc; photograph, transliteration and translation of the inscription in Seipel W, ed. Jemen, Kunst und Archäologie im Land der Königin von Saba’, Eine Ausstellung des Kunsthistorischen Museums Wien in Zusammenarbeit mit der Generalinstitution für Altertümer, Museen und Handschriften, Ministerium für Kultur und Tourismus der Republik Jemen. Wien: Kunstlerhaus, 9. November 1998 bis 21. Februar 1999: 90–91. Secondly, isolated letters on the inscribed pottery from al-Durayb Yala¯’, published in Garbini G. Le iscrizioni su ceramica da ad-Durayb-Yala¯. Yemen 1: 1992: 79–91, photographs and tracings. 15. Text no. 7 illustrated in Fig. 3, phase IVa, is published as No. 1 of the collection of texts on wood in the Dept. of Antiquities of the University of 8 atw tw al-musnad wal-nuqu¯s˘ Sw anca¯’ by Abdallah Y. H al-yama¯niyya al-qadı¯ma. Al-yaman al-g˘adı¯d 15: 1986: 6, 10–28, with two poor photographs: 16 (one repeated needlessly: 28). The photo at the bottom of p. 28 gives the beginning of lines 9–11 of the text presented here as Fig. 3, IVa, with the siglum ‘No. 8’ already illustrated in Ryckmans, Une e´criture minuscule: 198–199. 16. The references to Lihyanite palaeography refer to Caskel W. Lihyan und Lihyanisch. Köln/Opladen: Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Forschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, Geisteswissenschaften, 4: 1954: Schriftentafel 33–34. 17. See the publication mentioned in n. 12 which establishes correspondences between minuscule forms and signs deemed ‘aberrant’ in early monumental inscriptions.

18. Drewes AJ & Ryckmans J. Un pe´tiole de palme inscrit en sabe´en, no 14 de la collection de l’Oosters Instituut a` Leiden. PSAS 27: 1997: 225–233, photograph and tracing: 225–226. 19. That is to say the real or imaginary line on which the ‘body’ of the letters are aligned. 20. See Cohen M. La grande invention de l’e´criture et son e´volution. Paris: Klincksieck, 958: 339–430, who wrote, on the birth of Greek minuscule writing, ‘La caracte´ristique du trace´ rapide est le rapetissement du corps des lettres, qui a pour contrepartie des de´passements au-dessus et au-dessous’. A similar opinion in Jensen H. Die Schrift in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart, 3rd ed. Berlin: VEB Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften, 1969: 535. 21. Ryckmans, Pe´tioles de palmes: notes de pale´ographie 259. It is the fifth example in the table of writing styles illustrating the development of minuscule writing. The order of the last two examples should now be reversed so as to conform to their chronological order. 22. This form of g˙ayn is perhaps represented by a sign in text TYA No. 9, line 3, where the editors have read with hesitation a sw a¯d in the expression b-s˘(sw )y. 23. Ryckmans, Pe´tioles de palmes: un type nouveau de documents: 32. 24. Abdallah YM. Ein altsüdarabischer Vertragstext von den neuentdeckten Inschriften auf Holz. In: Nebes, Arabia Felix: 1–7 (transliteration, translation, commentary), 8–12 (photographs).

Address: J. Ryckmans 38 Bieststr. B – 3360 Lovenjoel-Bierbeek Belgium

235