ahead)' suggested in Chapter I/' who intended to represent that racial contrast, after the story had been rendered into Greek. The Alexandrian translator was undoubtedly well acquainted with the Scriptures and thus knew who Agag was. If he had found the gentilic noun "JJNn in his Hebrew text he certainly would have rendered it 'Ayayalo^, not Bovyahs}^There can scarcely be any doubt concerning the meaning of the latter term. The Persian word baga -' God ' is found in numerous Persian personal names, as for instance, Bagacaiis, Bagons, Bagopates, Bagophanes, Bagosaces, &c.'^Therefore, if we find Bovyam as gentilic name of a Persian, in a narrative the scene of action of which is Persia, we may reasonably see in it the Persian element baga and assume that BovyaTo? = Bayalo?. The same element no doubt occurs in the names of the eunuchs, Nnn and fn:2 . The latter is rendered in the Greek version BovyaOdv = BayaOdv. Paul Haupt's explanation of the Greek Bovyalo'i as a Homeric term, ' braggart ' is far fetched.-*^The fact that the Alexandrian translator was forced to substitute fictitious names for the genuine Persian names in the Hebrew text, evidently shows that he did not understand the Persian language. Nevertheless the gentilic noun Bovyalos is genuine Persian. Therefore we may safely assume that the equivalent of this term in the Hebrew original was not ''JJNn , but '32n ' the Bagoan '. A similar " Cf. Chapter I, n. 8. * Or the Alexandrian translator might have rendered it Tu'yaios, as did Lucian. The name Hegai usually rendered Tat in the Greek version, is 2. 15 rendered raifaio

ahead)' suggested in Chapter I/' who intended to represent that racial contrast, after the story had been rendered into Greek. The Alexandrian translator was undoubtedly well acquainted with the Scriptures and thus knew who Agag was. If he had found the gentilic noun "JJNn in his Hebrew text he certainly would have rendered it 'Ayayalo^, not Bovyahs}^There can scarcely be any doubt concerning the meaning of the latter term. The Persian word baga -' God ' is found in numerous Persian personal names, as for instance, Bagacaiis, Bagons, Bagopates, Bagophanes, Bagosaces, &c.'^Therefore, if we find Bovyam as gentilic name of a Persian, in a narrative the scene of action of which is Persia, we may reasonably see in it the Persian element baga and assume that BovyaTo? = Bayalo?. The same element no doubt occurs in the names of the eunuchs, Nnn and fn:2 . The latter is rendered in the Greek version BovyaOdv = BayaOdv. Paul Haupt's explanation of the Greek Bovyalo'i as a Homeric term, ' braggart ' is far fetched.-*^The fact that the Alexandrian translator was forced to substitute fictitious names for the genuine Persian names in the Hebrew text, evidently shows that he did not understand the Persian language. Nevertheless the gentilic noun Bovyalos is genuine Persian. Therefore we may safely assume that the equivalent of this term in the Hebrew original was not ''JJNn , but '32n ' the Bagoan '. A similar " Cf. Chapter I, n. 8. * Or the Alexandrian translator might have rendered it Tu'yaios, as did Lucian. The name Hegai usually rendered Tat in the Greek version, is 2. 15 rendered raifaio

No abstract

No abstract

THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SEMITIC LANGUAGES least satisfactory chapter in the book, not so much because of what it contains as because of what is omitted. Much more attention than is deserved is given to the astral theory of the pan-Babylonists. But perhaps a complete refutation of the claims of Winckler and his school was demanded from the pen of an English scholar. More space might have been given to tracing the influence of Babylonia upon Hebrew life and thought. The book shows the evidence of long and intimate acquaintance with the sources, and is always interesting. In a series of lectures delivered under the Richard B. Westbrook Lecture-ship Foundation at the Wagner Free Institute of Science, Philadelphia, and published with copious illustrations,' Professor Jastrow has made the first attempt "on a somewhat large scale to cover the entire subject of Babylonian Assyrian civilization for English readers." Two chapters (i and ii) on "Exca-vations" and "Decipherment" are followed by a "Survey of Babylonian and Assyrian History" (chap. iii). Chaps. iv and v are devoted to the "Gods of Babylonia and Assyria" and to the "Cults and Temples." "Law and Com-merce" (chap. vi) and "Art" (chap. vii) are next taken up, and the survey is rounded out with a chapter (viii) of "Specimens of Babylonian and Assyrian Literature." The author was well aware of the necessity of a careful selection of the materials to be presented in treating so large a subject and that in "such a selection personal judgment must inevitably be the guiding factor." At the outset we would register the opinion that the choice of topics was, on the whole, a happy one, and that a judicious selection, in the main, and a careful presentation of materials, has resulted successfully in affording the reader a general view of the civilization of the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. It is a question , however, whether in this day of manuals and brief surveys of science, religion, philosophy, and what not, Semitic scholars are not defeating their own purpose, namely, to reach a larger audience, when they issue volumes of from five to six hundred pages at prices ranging from five to ten dollars. There certainly was no pressing need for the repetition, in the volume under discussion, of the story of the rediscovery of the remains of the Babylonian civilization, nor for that of the decipherment of the cuneiform, romantic as these stories are. However, these are matters of personal judgment.