THE SINAI PROBLEM^OBERHUMMER. 677 



learned from the expected report of L. Kober, and the work on the 

 Sinai problem in preparation by Musil will certainly also furnish 

 new information. These publications will not be forestalled here, 

 but there will only be stated what is already generally accessible. 

 An elucidation of just this point seemed desirable because the full 

 history and present status of the Sinai problem is not only unknown 

 to wider cu'cles, but even among those who are occu])ying them- 

 selves with the question there seems to be uncertainty as regards 

 the priority of the several theories, which is not to l)e wondered at 

 considering the remoteness of some of the statements. 



If Musil's localization proves correct, to him will be tlue the credit 

 of having found the answer to the question introduced by Beke and 

 Gunkel concerning the transferring of the mountain of the promulga- 

 tion of the law from the Smaitic peninsula to Arabia. The import- 

 ance of this discovery can hardlj^ be overestimated. Infinite pains 

 and acumen have been spent in ascertaining the route of the Israelites 

 through the Sinaitic penmsula, and the literjiture on that subject 

 would fill a small library. Now all this has been "spoken to the 

 winds." The "Red Sea," after the miraculous crossing of which 

 the desert wandermg proper begms, is not longer the northern point 

 of the Gulf of Suez, but that of the Gulf of Akaba, which the Israelites, 

 assuming their sojourn in Egypt (which some modern Biblical criti- 

 cisms declare to be unhistoric), must have reached by the shortest route 

 north of the peninsula. The search for the stopping places on the 

 desert route may now be started in Midian, until now a chased country. 

 This may a})])ear to some as inconvenient, but it is hardly more so 

 than Ddr])felds transferring of Ithaca to I^eucas, which all of a 

 sudilen undermined all attemj)ts to prove the stage of the Odysseo 

 in all its details on a ])erfectl_y secure basis. Whether successfully, 

 only tjie future will jiroA'c. In both cases there is encumbent on (he 

 defender of the new theory not only to furnish positive evidence for 

 his view, but also to explain how the false localization and naming 

 obtained currency. In any case we stand as regards the Sinai prob- 

 lem at the beginning of a com]>lete revolution of all traditional views. 

 A new goal, one not easil}- reached, is now set before the tra^'elers in 

 search of Biblical places. 

 S53()0''— SM 1012 44 



