A Note on Transliterations
As this book is intended for a varied community of readers and
scholars and draws on sources in a variety of languages, I have
tried my best to simplify the complexity of the transliteration of
non-Latin languages. There are a few citations that are transliterated
with Akkadian words that include the sign sˇ(representing the
Semitic lettershin), which I replace withshfor the sake of ease
(as inAsˇsˇur/Ashur). The Japanese and Chinese in the book follow
the conventions of Hepburn romanization (commonly referred to
asro ̄maji) and the pinyin transliteration system. More important, for
Arabic and Hebrew, I have kept only the diacritics ofayn/ayin(as in
‘ilm/da‘at) andalif/alef(as in Qur’an/Miqra’ot). For biblical names,
I use the familiar transliterations, hence Reuben and not Re’uven,
Zebulun and not Zevulun, Issachar and not Issaschar. In many
cases, early modern English, Spanish, and Italian texts included
spellings that today would seem nonconventional (e.g., “neer” for
near); I have left them as they were written. I tried to represent
the original language of certain phrases and terms as much as
I could, without making it too difficult on the eyes. Hence, in
many cases, the original language appears in the endnotes.