Roots of Modern Arabic Script: From Musnad to Jazm
(Published in two parts by
the
Saad D. Abulhab
Introduction
Studying the origins of the Arabic script is an important and interesting undertaking since it is not merely a history topic. Understanding how Arabic evolved to its current forms is an important step to secure its future. Arabic script open interaction with its surrounding environment in the past should be an inspiration today.
For many centuries, scholars of the Muslim world differed on the origin of the script, but their differences were mainly about what group of Arab tribes had used it first. It was not until modern inscriptions hinted at an Aramaic Nabataean link that this topic became divisive. Since then, a lot of articles and books had debated the subject. Many of these articles and books simply repeated the conclusions of western scholars of the nineteenth century, based on a handful of inscriptions, about a Nabataean transformation to Arabic, without engaging any discussion. Few, like Mādūn, challenged this notion with serious and interesting analysis and reasoning. He speculated with illustrative details about a possible transformation of older Arabic Musnad shapes to modern ones, instead.18 However, many books and articles, today, disagree with the Aramaic Nabataean origin theory without offering a solid alternative theory.
In this article, I will not attempt to study each early inscription in detail since this cannot be covered in one brief essay. However, I will not restate theories without proper analysis, either. In addition to a brief discussion of the inscriptions available today, I will examine various important factors surrounding the birth of early Arabic script. Speculating about letter shapes of a few inscriptions alone does not constitute an adequate systematic methodology to drawing definite conclusions. One should study the origins of the Arabic script within the context of the overall scriptural, sociological, and geographical realities of the old Near East region at that time.
Early Alphabets in the
The earliest bits and pieces of an alphabet in the greater
Arabian Peninsula, including the Fertile Crescent, were found in the eastern
Mediterranean region located between ancient Mesopotamia (modern
In the same area and during the same time period, scientists
have also uncovered evidence for the existence of another important alphabet
system used by the Canaanites: the Ugaritic alphabet of the city state of
Inscriptions can not always determine, with absolute
certainty, precise timelines of ancient scripts. One can not always conclude
from a few found inscriptions when a specific script had started. However, it
is safe to assume based on inscriptions that around the 9th and
early 10th centuries BC, two well-formed alphabets with many common
shapes and similar overall look and feel had existed in the greater
One was the Phoenician alphabet of the eastern Mediterranean
shores, which scholars think was directly derived from earlier Canaanite or
even a transformed replacement of it. The second was the Arabic Musnad alphabet
of the Arabian Peninsula including ancient
Table of rough shapes of characters for few early alphabets |
Some experts believe that the Phoenician script was derived
from Arabic Musnad. German historian, Max Muller (1823-1900) thought it was
adapted from Musnad during the 9th century B.C. when the Minaean
Kingdom of Yemen controlled areas of the
Needless to say, there are few who argued that Musnad could have been adapted from Phoenician as well, during the Minaean times, but the restricted ordering of characters in Phoenician makes this less likely. Still, regardless of their exact starting dates and origins, the undisputed archeological fact is that Musnad and Phoenician had clear common roots and shapes. Furthermore, the earliest inscriptions of clear matured forms for both scripts belong to the same time period, around the 9th to10th centuries B.C.
The emergence of Cursive styles
Around the 3rd to 4th century B.C.,
inscriptions of the Near East further showed that Aramaic and its various
derived scripts had replaced Phoenician, becoming the main script of the
A Nabataean inscription on
the walls of |
Syriac inscription of the
Tripod Mosaic discovered by Segal in |
Earliest Syriac inscription dated 6 A.D. 12 |
Many scholars believe the Nabataean script was derived from
Syriac around the 2nd century B.C., but no evidence supports this claim.
While the Nabataean inscriptions can be photographed today on the walls of
ancient
By the 3rd and 4th centuries, it seems
that the practice of connecting letter forms was becoming popular in the
greater Peninsula and
Within this new cursive environment, scripts adjusted
differently. Some, like the Nabataean script, adapted full connectivity but
kept most letter forms unaltered. Others changed their letter forms radically
for the sake of connectivity, like cursive Musnad in
The development of any script is not a linear or precise process. Because of this nonlinearity and uncertainty, scientific research and studies regarding a script origin should involve elements of investigation, speculation, and a probabilistic approach. Scripts rarely develop in an isolated environment or by decree. Instead, they evolve through adaptation to surrounding scripts and actual socioeconomic materialistic needs. Under normal circumstances, people do not abandon their writing systems abruptly in favor of another.
The Greater
Prior to investigating a script origin, one should first establish what a derived script is. Identification should take into account the number of letters used and their dynamic and visual characteristics. Comparing few letter shapes alone is not enough to identify a script origin. One should study a script development within its surrounding sociological and geographical environment. A new script can be derived from multiple scripts not only a specific one. It can also be invented a new from scratch.
In the early centuries of the first millennium, the northern
area of the greater
The Arab tribes of the heartland were not isolated from the
religiously turbulent north though. Traditionally, Arab tribes enjoyed strong
ties with each other no matter where they settled. Historically these tribes
roamed large areas extending to the upper Tigris and
It is true that on the advent of Islam, the Aramaic derived
scripts were thoroughly established in most of the
Under foreign forces, the
The development of the new Arabic script, probably in the
early centuries of the first millennium, should be studied within this diverse
environment. Scripts with visually sophisticated curves like Pahlavi and Avesta
were now in nearby Mesopotamia.23 Greek, and Aramaic scripts
like Nabataean, Syriac, and Mandaen were just north of Hijaz. Although Arabic
Musnad and its derived styles continued to be the main script of northern Najd
(
Birth and development of the Arabic Script
The earliest style of the modern Arabic script, historically known as al-Jazm, was a product of its surrounding environment the same way newer scripts and re-reinvented ones became the product of an Arabic script dominated environment after Islam when Arabic became an inspirational force. During centuries of Arabic prominence, many older writing systems did not simply vanish. While their use was naturally diminishing, many had survived and have adapted to Arabic. Some were re-invented in the spirit of Arabic the same way Arabic was re-invented in the spirit of their original forms earlier. Researchers should not view the shapes of non Arabic scripts of the Muslim world today completely outside the frames of the Arabic script. It is not conceivable that the surviving Aramaic scripts were completely immune to the Arabic script environment after the Islamic era.
An outcome of doing otherwise was that some scholars believed that early Arabic may have been derived from Syriac or one of its closely related scripts of the early centuries, like Mandaic, Manichean, or Palmyrene. However, many inscriptions in that period revealed that Syriac, like early Nabataean, and Palmyrene, was not decidedly cursive.30 & 31 A multilingual inscription dated as late as 512 CE, from the heartland of the Syriac script, Zabad, showed mostly isolated Syriac letter forms, side by side Greek and fully cursive Arabic. Early Syriac inscriptions showed no signs of diacritic marks or dots, either. Arabic-like cursive and doted Peshitta manuscripts in Syriac Estrangelo script, believed to be from the 5th century, are more likely from the Islamic Era. Still, from an evolutionary perspective, the Syriac scripts should be thought of as genuine sisters of modern Arabic.
The argument above is also valid regarding further claims
that early Arabic may have been derived from one of the highly artistic Persian
scripts used in Mesopotamia during centuries of Sassanid rule.9
One can not deny that the leap of Arabic to its magnificent shapes during the
Abbasid dynasty have Persian artistic spirit all over it. This is expected
since
Pre-Islamic trilingual
inscription of Zabad found near |
However, the evolution of Arabic should not be confused with its origin. Inscriptions of Pahlavi and Avesta in the early centuries of the first millennium show sophisticated curves, seamlessness, and rhythm that may have affected early Arabic letterforms.3 Then again, while both scripts showed more tendency to connect letter forms than early Syriac, their connectivity was also a reluctant one. They surely did not share with the newly developing Arabic its major defining dynamics.
Kartirz Avesta inscription found on the Kabah of Zartusht. Dated to the 3rd Century 5 |
In the tenth century, Ibn al-Nadīm, a well-known Muslim librarian and historian whose background we shall present later, described several old and new Persian scripts. His sketches of letters shapes of some of the surviving ones in his time were not that of their original forms. Most sketches showed curves resembling those of old Pahlavi but forms similar to those of Persian Nasta`līq style. Referring to an earlier version of one such script, he called Firamuz, which is sometimes cited as the Arabic-like Persian script predating Arabic, Ibn al-Nadīm explained that it “was derived and wrote by the Persians. It is a recent development in two forms.” His statement clearly indicates that this Arabic derived Persian script came later.22
Taq e-Bostan Pehlavi inscription of Shapur III. Dated to late 3rd Century 36 |
Still, some theories on the origin of Arabic may support a
possible early Persian influence. Many believe that the Arabic script was first
used in the Ḥīrah and ´Anbār area of
It is commonly believed today that Bushr ibn `Abd al- Malik
al-Kindī, believed to be a Christian Arab, was the first to bring Jazm
from Ḥīrah to
Do not deny Bushr’s* favors to you (* Bushr ibn `Abd al-Malik)
He was a man of open blessed wisdom
He brought you al-Jazm calligraphy until you saved
the money that was plenty and scattered
You then moved the pens back and forth
as skilful as scribers of Kisrá* and Qaysar* (* Sassanid and Roman Emperors)
And had no need to Musnad of father Ḥimyr* (* Father of Yemen Himyrite tribes)
and whatever the Himyrite* kings wrote on pages
Roots of Jazm: Nabataean or Musnad?
However, today, most scholars believe that Jazm had evolved
during the 4th century from the Nabataean script. Nevertheless, a
thorough examination of early inscriptions mostly point to other roots. The
author believes that the early Arabic script, Jazm, was independently developed
by the Arab tribes settling north of Ḥijāz, and
The way cursive Jazm flow along a horizontal line is unique. It lays letters shapes horizontally employing smoother curves and even alternative shapes. It has a connectivity style and rhythm that can be better identified with that of cursive Musnad than cursive Nabataean and it shares with it the use of extended horizontal strokes. In fact, while Nabataean connects vertical letters as is, cursive Musnad transforms them before joining. With a stretch of imagination, some Nabataean shapes can be made to resemble those of Jazm, but so do many Musnad shapes. Still, as stated earlier, shapes similarity is not the only indication of script origin especially since Nabataean, Aramaic, and Musnad, share the same roots.
In Arabic, the word Musnad means “supported” but in the
context of script, it means monumental or vertically standing. Like Phoenician
and Aramaic, Musnad was written with isolated unique letter shapes, and despite
occasional multi ordering, it was primarily a right to left script. Centuries
later, also like them, Musnad had witnessed the introduction of few distinct
derived styles. Most notable were the northern Lihyani and Safawī,
and nomadic Thamūdī. It is a common mistake today to treat Musnad as
a single style, Saba´ī, limited by single geographic area: south
Inscriptions dated back to the 3rd century show advanced cursive Musnad forms clearly illustrating its flexibility and visual adaptation. This highly cursive script, also known as South Arabian Minuscules or popular Musnad, was utilized by ancient Yemenis to inscribe everyday documents on softer wooden sticks. Standard Musnad was primarily used for rock-cut monumental inscriptions.27 Clearly, Musnad was not “fixed on stone” while its relatives in the north evolved into a variety of other forms. Certainly, the development of a northern Musnad cursive style can not be ruled out.
To the Arabs of Ḥijāz and the rest of the greater
Cursive Arabic Musnad transcription
on wooden stick in ancient |
Like the word Musnad, the word al-Jazm most definitely had a direct script-related meaning. In fact, several pre Islamic poems had mentioned both names. In an Arabic dictionary the verb jazza means “to cut from” which indicates that the derived noun Jazm must have referred to a script being cut from another probably by simplification and letter shapes reduction. This fits exactly what Jazm did in relation to Musnad.
Jazm carries clear markings of an original independent
script. Most likely, the northern Arab inventors of Jazm were familiar with
Nabataean, a prominent script in the area, but at the same time, they were even
more familiar with Musnad. Inscriptions show that they have used it during the
Nabataean period. Even though some northern tribes had adapted Nabataean
Aramaic shapes, the majority of the northern Arab tribes continued using
Musnad. Monumental Musnad was widely inscribed on Arabian gods from
Evidently, the development of Jazm was a continuous process
spanning over several centuries. Early inscriptions before and after the
emergence of Islam included both isolated and attached forms of the same
letters. It seems that Jazm had only matured after the emergence of the Kufic
style. Although this style is named after Kufa in modern
Work of Early Islamic Era Scholars
Before discussing the inscriptions discovered in modern days, it is important to examine works of early prominent Muslim scholars regarding Musnad and the origins of Jazm. Although Musnad was not used anymore after Islam, these scholars knew much about it prior to the western discoveries of the nineteenth century. Without a doubt, early Muslim scholars had access to more and better inscriptions than those we have today. While most had differed on the origins of Jazm as a writing style, it seems that they had taken it for granted that Jazm was of a Musnad background.
One such scholar is Ibn al-Nadīm (929 CE -996 CE), a
librarian living in
Before giving his personal account, Ibn al-Nadīm wrote that
“Ḥimyar used to write with the Musnad script, with varied forms of
Alīf, Bā´, Tā´.” The Ḥimyar refer to the people of modern
Immediately after presenting the Musnad shapes, he gave his personal opinion. He wrote that “The first of the Arab scripts was the script of Makkah, the Next of al-Madīnah, then of al-Basrah, then of al-Kūfah. For the Alifs of the scripts of Makkah and al-Madīnah there is a turning of the hand to the right and lengthening of strokes, one form having a slight slant”. He then gave an example.22
Arabic Musnad alphabet as sketched by Ibn al-Nadīm (d 990 CE) in his book al-Fihrast written around 970 CE. Letters order is that of old Ḥijāz and Tihāmah which is almost identical to the one used today by Arabic dictionaries.22 Arabic letters highlighted in green by author for clarity. |
Another well-known Muslim scholar, al-Hamadhānī, had also provided sketches of the Musnad alphabet in his book, al-´Iklīl, which he wrote in 950 CE.18 His work confirmed Ibn al-Nadīm observation of the use of varied shapes per letter. In addition to Alīf, Bā´, and Tā´, he listed varied shapes for Rā´, Dhā´, Zā´, Lām, Mīm, Nūn, and Hā´. One interesting observation from his sketch was the use in Musnad of three position-dependent shapes for the letter Hā´. Modern inscriptions had confirmed most letters shapes of Musnad as observed by both scholars.
Arabic Musnad alphabet as sketched by al-Hamadhāmī in his book al-´Iklīl written around 945 CE.18 The Arabic letters are ordered here according to old Najd Arabic alphabet. 26 Arabic letters highlighted in green by author for clarity. |
The smart note by Ibn al-Nadīm about right slanted Alīf was confirmed by all pre Islamic Arabic inscriptions dating back to the forth, fifth and Sixth centuries. The varied shapes of Musnad Alīf sketched by al-Hamdhānī had even included two such right slanted Alīfs. Also, the fact that the earliest Kufic inscriptions were found in Madīnah indicates a trend of northward script movement from Ḥijāz, which was Ibn al-Nadīm key observation. Considering their nomadic nature, this fact should not exclude the possibility that tribes elsewhere in the peninsula could have mastered the Ḥijāzī style of Jazm even before the arrival of Islam.
Several other prominent Muslim scholars believed Arabic Jazm
was derived from Musnad. Among these was Ibn Khaldūn and
al-Qalqashandī. They both wrote that Jazm was originally known in
Pre-Islamic Arabic Jazm Inscriptions
There are seven pre-Islamic Jazm inscriptions available to
researchers today. The earliest one was found in Jabal al-Ramm east of Aqabah.
It dates back to 328 CE. The next earliest inscriptions are the two found in
Sakākah of northern
Table of letter shapes of
various Arabic Musnad styles and early Arabic Jazm of the greater |
The remaining three inscriptions are all dated to the 6th
century. The first one was found in Zabad of northern
Pre-Islamic Arabic Jazm inscription
of Jabal al-´Usays found south of |
Pre-Islamic Arabic Jazm
from a Greek-Arabic bilingual inscription found in Ḥarrān, south
of |
It is worth noting here that dating inscriptions is dependent on how scholars read their contents. Therefore, the above dates are not necessarily accurate. Only the inscriptions of ´Usays and Ḥarrān explicitly mentioned dates. Each date had two isolated parts following the word “Sanat” (Arabic for year.) Experts read the two parts combined in each as Nabataean numbers, 423 and 463, which can be questioned. First, looking from right to left, it was assumed that the first part in both referred to the number 400 despite clear visual difference of the two. The first part in Ḥarrān could be Nabataean number 200 or even the Arabic word “nahw” for “approximately”. Second, one can not rule out the possibility that the last identical portion of the second parts could have been a reference to a year or event rather than the number 23, since, as we shall see later, this same final part will appear again in another Nabataean inscription. Fortunately, the date of the multilingual Zabad inscription was secured by the Greek inscription next to it.
Also worth noting here is that no pre Islamic Arabic
inscription was found yet in the area around Ḥīrah and ´Anbār,
in
As for Nabataean, numerous inscriptions are available today
dating as early as 3rd century BC, but only four, out of several
thousands found, had Arabic language text. These are
frequently presented as evidence that Jazm was derived from Nabataean. The
earliest one had only two Arabic text lines and it was found in Ein Avadat,
present day
Then there is the Raqqūsh inscription found in
Madā´in Sālih
in northern Ḥijāz,
Undisputedly, the inscriptions listed above are all important tools in the study of early Arabic development, but depending on these few pre Islamic inscriptions alone can be misleading. First, etching letters on hard surfaces can distort significantly intended forms. Second, by referencing few inscriptions alone one would not have enough data to make informed conclusions since only few letters shapes are revealed. Third, all referenced inscriptions belonged to a limited geographic area which would make a comprehensive study impossible.
Evidence of Early Islamic Inscriptions
A balanced study of Arabic script roots must examine letter forms of the early Islamic decades since they show more precise shapes on non stone media. It is not clear as why no pre-Islamic inscriptions on such media are available, especially knowing that we do have Arabic papyri from as early as the second decade of the Islamic Hijrī calendar. Also recall that Ibn al-Nadīm wrote about his handling a pre-Islamic Musnad manuscript.
The two earliest Islamic inscriptions were found in Madīnah and are dated to 4 Hijrī calendar (625 CE.) Both had reasonably developed Kufic shapes.11 Also from the first Hijrī decade, we have two of Prophet Muhammad letters, allegedly in the handwriting of his cousin `Alī ibn ´Abī Tālib, to al-Mundhir ibn Sāwī, ruler of Bahrain and conqueror of al-Ḥasā´, and Heraclius (Hirqal) the Byzantines emperor. They included very valuable letters forms (like Hā´ and `ayn) that can shed a light on the characteristics of early Arabic shapes. In total, it is believed that Prophet Muhammad had sent five to eight letters to neighboring leaders.15
Many Islamic inscriptions dating from the first few decades of Islam are available to researchers. Noted among them are the two earliest Arabic papyri dated to 22 Hijrī calendar (642 CE). One is a bilingual inscription including Greek writing which is kept
One of the two earliest
Arabic Kūfī inscriptions found in |
today in the
Early Arabic Kūfī
inscription on a rock in Ṭa´if, |
From the earliest Arabic
papyrus dated to 22 Hijrī calendar (642 CE) containing Arabic and Greek
text. Kept in the |
Arabic Kufi inscription
found near Karbalā´, |
Several early papyri of Qur´ān are also available, most
written in the Kufic style. One Qur´ān papyrus from Madīnah was
identified as an example of a rare, short lived, Mā´il calligraphic style
and it was dated to the 8th century, but the author believes it is
much older, probably mid 7th century. 25 The letter forms of this papyrus are almost identical to
that of the two early papyri mentioned above, and that of early Kufic from one
the oldest copies of Qur´ān on parchment kept in the Egyptian National
Library in
From a page of an early
Qur’ān (Sūrah 24:37) papyrus written in |
From a page in one of the earliest
Qur’an (Surah 10:59) on parchment, written in early undotted Kufic style in |
Another important early kufic
Islamic inscription can be found on the outer and inner mosaic of the octagonal
Arcades of the Dome of the Rock in
Some of the inscriptions at
the Dom of the Rock in |
Curiously, the inscription at the Dome of the Rock was a main ingredient of the latest “academic coup d'état” in the field of Arabic and Islamic studies, led by a group of German researchers. Taking advantage of western readers’ unfamiliarity with the concept of Islamic Du`ā´, some put forward an unsubstantiated claim that the Qur´ān did not exist at the time period of this inscription; that is during the Umayyad Caliphate. Despite a wealth of available information and material evidence indicating otherwise, they further claim that the passages of this inscription were “proto-ingredients” that were incorporated into what was to become the Qur´ān after the advent of the Abbasid era in 750 CE.
One of these researchers, writing under the pseudonym: Christoph Luxenburg, believes that the Qur´ān was originally a Syriac Christian book that was translated, sometimes incorrectly, to Arabic.28 Fishing out possible coincidental Syriac words combinations within pre-diacritics Arabic script, and exploiting a few known and expected scriptural and interpretational uncertainties in a historical book like the Qur´ān, Luxenburg formulates rather bizarre and contradicting linguistic alternatives. However, it is already acknowledged by Muslims that the allegories and teachings of the Qur´ān are associated with those of Judaism and Christianity, and that the Arabic language had commonly adapted non-Arabic words. Sharing similar roots and timelines, Syriac Aramaic, a sister language that was itself significantly affected by Arabic before and particularly after the Islamic dominance in the 7th century, is therefore a poor etymological reference for Arabic. Luxenburg’s work seems more a religious fundamentalist venture than a scholarly research.
The most striking facts of early Islamic inscriptions are the rich and culturally diverse use of shapes, limited or slightly differing shapes per letter, and loose observation of connectivity. One can easily spot earlier Musnad or Nabataean shapes in various positional forms. It seems that even in the early decades of Islam the Arabs were interchanging letter shapes using a large cache of forms they were previously exposed to. A few obvious examples are the use of final Yā´, medial `Ayn, medial Hā´, ligature of medial Bā´ before Rā´, and the medial Qāf of Kufic style. One can argue whether these shapes had come from Nabataean or Musnad, but the fact is Jazm can not be assumed immune to the influence of either script.
The Nabataean Script Influence on Jazm
Examining early Arabic inscriptions leaves little doubt that
early Jazm was developed in northern
Historically, the area of the Nabataean tribes was known to be a refuge for persecuted people in ancient surrounding cities. Based on geography and Roman history, it is clear that the overwhelming majority of the Nabataeans were ethnically Arab tribes who had adapted the language and script of neighboring Aramaic centers.8 Their adaptation of foreign culture had not only set precedents to other Arab tribes in the north but had also created the open environment that was crucial to the development of Jazm.
It is not clear as when the Nabataean script ceased to exist. The dating of the earliest Arabic Jazm inscription and the latest Arabic Nabataean inscription to one year, namely 328 CE, is too ironic. It leaves the misleading impression that the Nabataean script had evolved to Arabic Jazm. None of the other Aramaic scripts in the same geographic area was transformed significantly to a completely different looking script before the Islamic era, why would the Nabataean script be transformed?
The Nabataean kingdom lasted from around 300 BC until its annexation by the Roman Empire in the year 106 CE, but the city of Petra continued its role as an important city in the area until the sixth century.34 The question is why would people abandon their script abruptly few decades before Islam in favor of a significantly different one? One possible hypothesis is that the Nabataean gradual decline had opened the doors for greater influence from surrounding Arab tribes bringing in a newer script.
The argument above can explain why only a fraction of the Nabataean inscriptions were in the Arabic language. It may even explain why late Nabataean inscriptions had significantly more cursive forms than older ones. Among the Arab tribes in the former Nabataean areas, a newly arriving Jazm may have simply replaced the Nabataean script. Understandably, this argument does not exclude the possibility that Arabic was derived independently from the Nabataean script and co-existed with it before replacing it.
In the early decades of Islam, the Arabs seem to be confused about the origins of the Nabataean people, but several early accounts from Muslim army leaders suggested that they were ethnically a mixture of Arabs and non Arabs.
The Fihrast of Ibn al-Nadīm indicated that they did not
speak Arabic. In several pages it referred to Ibn al-Waḥshiyah
al-Kildānī, originally from a city near Kūfah, translating
numerous Nabataean texts to Arabic. Sometimes he was named al-Kisdānī
which seems to be a scribing error of the Kāf-Lām ligature. Quoting
one of their magicians, Ibn al-Nadīm describes the Nabataeans as “black,
barefoot, with cloven heels.” Incidentally, according to al-Fihrast, it
seems that the Arabs believed that the Nabataean language was the old language
of
When isolated, many Nabataean letters are almost identical to those of Aramaic or Aramaic Hebrew. Forcing connectivity seemed as an after thought. The Nabataeans were probably exposed to scripts practicing connectivity in their vicinity. Such cursive script could have been a cursive Musnad variant. Possibly, they wanted to set their new script apart from surrounding Aramaic scripts by incorporating an existing defining feature or inventing one. It is interesting to note here that the cursive rules of late Nabataean are generally similar to those of early Arabic.
Numerous inscriptions from the
In the early centuries, predominantly Arab Palmyra, not far
from the Nabataean area, used two writing systems, a monumental isolated script
and a cursive Mesopotamian script. This was probably due to its location on the
trade route between
It is very important to observe here that evidence of Nabataean shapes usage in early Jazm inscriptions is limited geographically to areas of Nabataean influence. It is also limited to few pre-Islamic inscriptions. One can not conclude with absolute certainty if these shapes represented original Jazm shapes or just temporary localized ones.
Musnad Roots of Arabic Jazm
Despite hints of Nabataean influence, judging by available Islamic and pre-Islamic inscriptions, it is undeniable that Jazm was primarily derived from a Musnad background. Identical letter shapes like Rā´, Wāw, `Ayn, and Hā´ were used in Jazm even after Islam. By examining Musnad shapes in all its variants including cursive styles, one can easily spot common visual characteristics with Jazm and later calligraphic styles like Kūfi. The letters Sheen, Yā´, Mīm, Lām, `Ayn, Hā´, Jīm, Fā´, Qāf, Dhāl, Zā´, Kāf, and Nūn, can all be traced to Musnad.
The extent to which Musnad shapes changed to over the centuries supports the above shapes transformations hypothesis. Evidence shows that a typical scriptural transformation process can involve flipping and rotating shapes along with minor or major eliminations of components. In Musnad, this would mean rotating monumental letters to assume horizontal positions and eliminating parts that interfere with a smooth cursive writing process or letters shapes recognition and differentiation.
The earliest pre-Islamic Arabic Jazm inscription found near Jabal al-Ramm, east of Aqabah. Dated 328 CE. From a photograph by Lankester Harding 7 |
The earliest Arabic inscription, Ramm, did not include clear
letter forms to study, but it was important since it included a mixture of Musnad
and Jazm letters. Grimme believed the Arabic text was inscribed earlier.
Bellamy thought otherwise. The two differed completely in their readings of the
Arabic text but agreed on ignoring the Musnad text.7
Madun believes this inscription is the missing link between Jazm and Musnad. He
read both texts as one.18 The
author believes that letters of both scripts were inscribed together and the
value of this inscription is primarily in the presence of Musnad shapes side by
side primitive Jazm. As we saw earlier, the Raqqūsh Nabatean inscription
included Musnad too. No one questioned its presence there. Why should we then
question it in Ramm, especially when the quality of shapes of both texts is
identical, and the usage of random text direction within one inscription is
quite common in old
The pre-Islamic Jazm Umm al-Jimāl inscription is probably the most significant and controversial one. Scholars differed on its date, but most believe it belongs to the 5th or 6th century. Some refer to it as the second Umm al-Jimāl inscription to differentiate it from the earlier Nabataean Umm al-Jimāl inscription mentioned above. It seems that this
inscription had used multiple shapes for Hā´ in its final, medial, and isolated forms, twice each. This usage confirms both al-Hamadhānī and Ibn al-Nadīm sketches regarding multiple Musnad Hā´ shapes. Also, the medial shapes of Hā´ in this inscription clearly match those seen in the two available letters of Prophet Muhammad, which were written a century later. The two letters included a total of eight words with initial and medial Musnad Hā´ shapes.
Pre-Islamic Arabic Jazm
inscription of Umm al-Jimāl found south of |
Many today read the second word of the first line as ghafara and the first word of the third line as al-khulayd or al-qulayd. The author reads the first word as `ahada or ´ahuda and the second al-hunayd. Reading a Nabataean Rā´ in ghafara would contradict with the current reading of all previous and subsequent inscriptions. Jazm had consistently used Musnad Rā´ even in the early decades of Islam. In Arabic the word ghafara means “forgave.” Mādūn argued ghafara here meant “to protect” or “to keep safe” but this use is rare. The words `ahada and satara are more commonly used instead.
A photograph of an original
copy of Prophet Muhammad letter to the Byzantines Emperor, Heraclius, who was
stationing in |
Re-Trace by the author of Prophet Muhammad letter Heraclius from a previous trace of another original copy kept in the collection of the Lebanese millionaire Henry Fir`awn.18 Words with medial Musnad letter Hā´, al-hudá (top) and ´ishhadū (bottom,) are highlighted in green. |
A photograph of Prophet
Muhammad letter to al-Mundhir ibn Sāwī, ruler of |
Re-Trace by the author of Prophet Muhammad letter to al-Mundhir ibn Sāwī from a previous trace that was compared to the original photograph. 16 Words with initial and medial Musnad letter Hā´ are highlighted in green. They are from right to left and top to bottom: ´ishhad, ´amruhum, lahum, ´ahl, minhum, and mahma. |
One of the earlier inscriptions of Sakākah may have also used medial position Musnad Hā´. Muaikel spelled the first word as Ba´, `Ayn, Sīn, and Wāw, assumingly referring to a name, Ba`sū.21 However, this is not a known, Arabic sounding, name. Besides, the third letter does not even remotely resemble any Arabic or Nabataean shape for the letter Seen. Reading a hint of a middle tooth, in an inscription full with similar slightly raised areas, is bizarre. Clearly, this letter looks more like a Musnad Ha as discussed above. The word is probably bā`ahū or bi`hū which in Arabic would mean “sold him” and “sell him” respectively. At least, reading this word in this manner would match the current reading of the inscription which is supposedly about a slave of ´Umru´ al-Qays.
One of two pre-Islamic
Arabic Jazm inscriptions found in |
Evidence that early Arabic was independently derived from a cursive Musnad background can be seen in its usage of a unique Alīf shape resembling one of the variant shapes used by northern Safawī Musnad style. That Alīf is slanted to the right with an angle identical to slanted cursive Musnad. This unique slanted Alīf can be seen in all inscriptions. Even Hamadhānī observed it in his sketch of Musnad shapes. The small Nabataean shape of looped Alīf which was commonly placed much higher above the base line is very unlikely to transform to Jazm Alīf.
Further supporting our argument are the papyri inscriptions of that not-so-rare Quranic Mā´il calligraphic style and the two account papyri mentioned above. The author believes that this Mail style was not unusual, short lived, calligraphic style born after Islam as it is commonly thought today. It seems that Mā´il was the Ḥijīzī style of early Arabic Jazm which was gradually phased out by the Kufic and Naskh styles after Islam. In fact, letters forms of early Kufic style are almost identical to those of Mā´il. Examining Mā´il papyri one can easily observe not only the slanted Alīfs but also the miniature Safawī Musnad Wāw.
The most compelling evidence of Jazm cursive Musnad connection is the way it joins letter shapes along a straight horizontal line. The same extended, open-ended, horizontal strokes seen to the left of almost every cursive Musnad letter is used in cursive Jazm. This unique approach sets it apart from Nabataean or other scripts in the area. It is possible to imagine that sometimes during the 3rd century the Nabataeans had altered their letter shapes significantly to conform to complete horizontality, but the same can be argued for Musnad.
Questioning the Nabataean Inscriptional Evidence
As was mentioned earlier, the theory of a Nabataean transformation is completely based on three Arabic inscriptions in Nabataean script. One of these inscriptions is Raqqūsh. It is said to represent the earliest Arabic forms.35 & 13 However, the existence of few Arabic looking connected words in that inscription seems to be coincidental. The word qabrū (Arabic for grave) was repeated three times in the inscription but only once it resembled Arabic. Raqqūsh is a classic late Nabatean inscription, or at best it could be Nabataean inscribed by someone with Jazm background. This would agree with experts who labeled it as a “border dialect.”
Earliest Nabataean
inscription of Arabic text found in Madā´in Salih,
northern Ḥijāz, |
Incidentally, it is not very peculiar to see dots in the
Raqqūsh inscription. As stated earlier, dots are possibly a pre Islamic
invention. Persian scripts like Pahlavi and Avesta may have used dots earlier.
The script of
Found Earlier, but dated few decades later, the Namārah
Nabataean inscription is also widely indicated as an early Jazm connection. The
first abstract sketch produced from the original stone, which is kept in the
Visually retracing and rereading the inscription in the 1980s of last century, Bellamy mainly reinforced earlier Dussaud observations, but in absence of physical examination, it is quite difficult to judge the Namārah shapes from photographs. For example, Bellamy provided three photographs that show significantly different letter lines in the deteriorated area on the second text line where a Lām-Alīf ligature was supposedly used in the word al-´Asadiyyīn. The problem is clarifying one area in a picture significantly changed the appearance of lines in other areas. As Bellamy himself puts it, “photographs can be deceptive.” 6
Assuming the current shapes of Namārah are accurate, problems still exists regarding their interpretations. Current readings are not totally objective. They assume in advance that this inscription represented a “developed form of Nabataean alphabet, well on its way to becoming Arabic”.6 But one can argue important contradictions in these readings.
The first line was translated as “this is the funerary monument of ´Umru´ al-Qays,” giving the impression that the Namārah stone was once placed on his grave, but the Arabic reading, on the other hand, was “tī nafs mru´ l-Qays”. The two do not match since tī is not an Arabic word for “this” and nafs in Arabic means “soul” not “grave.” Also, since the earlier Raqqūsh inscription had explicitly and extensively used the Arabic word qabrū for grave, why wouldn’t an inscription, only a few decades later, use this same word?
Despite the fact that most words in the current reading of the inscription are clearly Arabic words, `akdī is not. Experts differed significantly about its meaning, but they believed that it could be and old Arabic adverb word meaning “thereafter” or “forever”, which is not convincing. The word `akdī appeared in two sentences. First in “harraba mahjū `akdī wa ja´ ..” then in “`akdī halak sanat ..”. The author believes `akdī is a name and that Namarah was either a burial stone or an honorary monument for a colleague of ´Umru´ al-Qays named `akdī. Hence, and after an opening sentence in honor of ´Umru´ al-Qays, Namarah listed `akdī’s accomplishments before stating the date of his death.
Nabataean inscription of
Namārah found south of |
As for the inscriptions of Ḥarrān and ´Usays, the dating of Namārah Nabatean inscription was also based on the reading of two parts number following the Arabic word for year. Looking from right to left, the last portion of the second part was identical visually in all three inscriptions. It was read by experts as the number 23. This reading would make dates of all three inscriptions having same least significant number, 3, which is too ironic. Additionally, after researching Nabataean numerals, no definitive equivalence to that shape was found.10 As mentioned earlier, it can not be ruled out that this symbol may have represented an event or a year mark, not a number.
Dating the Namārah inscriptions is very important since
the second oldest Arabic Jazm inscription found in
Conclusion
Arabic Jazm in its early centuries was most likely a localized version of cursive Musnad used by northern Arabian tribes. Clearly, Musnad was not set in stone while its relatives, Phoenician and Aramaic scripts, evolved into a variety of other styles. Because of their nomadic nature the northern Arab tribes were exposed to a wide range of neighboring letter forms which had affected Jazm development. Evidently, the lack of utilization by a powerful central state had prolonged the Jazm development cycle.
For a long time, early Arabic was torn between its Musnad roots and the more mature Aramaic scripts around it. It may have had incorporated several Nabataean shapes, but it is hard to definitely claim it was a transformed Nabataean script based on a couple of inscriptions distantly resembling Arabic, especially since Aramaic Nabataean and Musnad have similar shape roots, and especially, since determining shapes of an inscription is not a definite and precise scientific process.
It is not clear which northern Arab tribes had first used
Jazm. This is not important, however, since despite their vast geographic area,
these tribes were very close culturally. Most definitely, the emergence of pre
Islamic Mecca as a prominent center for trade and worship in the
The Arab tribes of Ḥīrah could have been the originators of Jazm, or may be due to their exposure to Persian Sassanid scripts, could have been the ones who had significantly transformed it by incorporating smoother curves and rhythm. However, the direct predecessor of modern Arabic was the Jazm style of Ḥijāz. In fact, Arabic had only developed into clear solid script after the emergence of Islam when a derived style, Kūfī, became the official and religious script of the new Islamic state.
Arabic Jazm was a script with powerful shapes and dynamics.
Being a true regional product shaped by the forms of both Musnad and Aramaic,
it had quickly established itself as the unifying script of the greater Arabian
Peninsula, North Africa, and
Bibliographic References
http://www.nd.edu/%7Esheridan/Jordan%202000/Jordan%202000.html
Acknowledgement
All diagrams in this article were prepared by Hassan Jamil a
recent graduate of
About the Author
Type
designer, librarian, and systems engineer, Saad D. Abulhab, was born in 1958 in