THE LIST 01' SHKSHONQ AT KARNAK. 117 



of Diouati. The former name Sliarounram seems at first to 

 be foreign to the fSemitic languages; but the combination 



/WVA/\ /VSA/'A'- ^^'i-f^ /WVV^A 



,1 I Km' in Egyptian has not, at least in the 



transcriptions of foreign names, any other value than that of 

 r or / strongly pronounced. Sharounram is then a derivative 



either of the root 77U} traxit^ extraxit, sjyoliavit, or of the root 



I'lU? torsit, firmus, durus fnit, opprei^sit. The termination 



\\ ^ may answer to D**" of the plural ; but this inflexion is 



almost always written in our list Avith a final vowel ^= ma, 



and without \\. I think rather that there is here a mistake 



of the cutter, and that we should read [1 "^ instead of Q |s. : 



we should then have to do with a name H77tl?) rr^HT. 



•L \\ \\ Diouati, derived from the root "T^l amavit. 

 ^ ( _M^t^^ ... 



whence the name of king David, or from the root TV^ 



T T 



languit, cpgrohis fuit. Neither of these localities has left any 

 still recognizable traces. 



Some may perhaps be astonished to see me indicate so 

 minutely the Hebrew roots to which this and that name of 

 our list seems to me to answer. This is not affectation of 

 pliilological research : it is, I believe, an indispensable pre- 

 caution in the hazardous sort of study to which I have been 

 bound to devote myself. One is only too prone to suppose 

 an error of the copyist, a mistake of the scribe who has com- 

 piled the list, and to invert the order of the letters to obtain 

 a comparison with an ancient or modern name already known. 

 In shewing that the Egyptian letters transcribed in Hebrew 

 letters yield regular or possible Hebrew forms, I avoid 

 for myself, and perhaps for scholars who will treat this 

 subject after me, the temptation to attribute to an error of 

 the scribe the presence of so many unknown names, and the 

 fault of modifying these names by inversion or by substitution 

 of one articulation for another. If our transcriptions in 

 Hebrew letters give us regular Avords, it is because the 

 Egyptian scribes reproduced as exactly as their alphabet 

 alloAved them the sounds that they heard in Jud^a : we have 

 not then the right to make any change in their trans- 

 literation. 



Nos. 108-110 furnish ns with the first absolutely certain 

 identification Avhich Ave liaA^e in this part of the list : 



kA ^ ^''^^x^ U ^vi. liaqaraim Arada, The 



