Jews and Others
it ‘Rekemē,’ being called ‘Petra’ among the Greeks.’’Rekemēmust have been
what he wrote in the passage quoted above, as a Nabataean inscription con-
firms.^26
Josephus has thus chosen a way of vocalising the name which he found in
the Hebrew Bible and the LXX, which allows him to apply the Greek pro-
cedure of finding, or inventing, a legendary founder of a city; the simplest
procedure was always to assume that the names of the ‘‘founder’’ and city
would be closely similar. But he has also, as he does consistently, highlighted
the contemporary Nabataeans as against other Arabs. He was of course none
the less aware that persons labelled ‘‘Arabs’’ could also be found as far away
as the Parthian domains across the Euphrates.^27
Josephus never explicitly says that he has derived his identification of the
descendants of Ishmael as Arabs from the name of Ishmael’s firstborn as given
in the text of Genesis, NBYT/LXX:Nabaiōth. But the ethnic name of the
Nabataeans, as it appears in Nabataean documents, is in any case spelled dif-
ferently, NBṬW.^28 Modern philologists have not in general accepted that
there is any relationship or equivalence between these terms.^29 But that does
not mean that ancient writers might not have believed that there was; ‘‘false’’
etymologies played an important part in the cultural history of the ancient
world. In this case, however, it should be stressed that the equivalence in
question is Josephus’ own and is not derived from the LXX. For although the
termNabataioiwas already in use in Jewish circles in the Hellenistic period,
as its appearance inMaccabeesshows,^30 it is used nowhere else in LXX.
. Josephus,Ant. , . The Semitic name of Petra is attested in Nabataean, as RQMW,
in an inscription published by J. Starcky, ‘‘Nouvelle épitaphe nabatéenne donnant le nom
sémitique de Pétra,’’RB (): –. I am grateful to Avraham Negev for reminding
me of this text.
. Josephus,BJ, .
. There is in fact a puzzle here for there seems to be an implicit difference of opinion
among specialists in Nabataean, a dialect of Aramaic, as to whether NBṬW denotes a people
or a region. The latter view is taken by J. Cantineau,Le NabatéenII (), : ‘‘de pays
ou de lieu.’’ But the former view is taken consistently in modern treatments of the royal
titulature as found on inscriptions and coins. See, e.g., Y. Meshorer,Nabataean Coins().
. Note, however, that E. C. Broome, ‘‘Nabaiat, Nebaioth and the Nabataeans: The
Linguistic Problem,’’JSS (): , argues that the crucial factor will have been pronun-
ciation rather than spelling, and that a shift from a written form withtau(T)toonewith
tet(Ṭ) could have occurred. The argument is necessarily hypothetical.
. SeeMacc.:;:.