150 
not to the Assyrian rahimu (Dn'l), but to the Arabic raham 
which signifies multitude. 
[As to Eamu, compare my remarks on Tob, &c., p. 4, and the definition 
given by Hesychius. Mr. Girdlestone mentioned to me the other day the 
very curious parallel of mo-rimo, a word used in a vague way by the 
Bechuanas on the Kuruman river for some upper power, and rescued by 
Dr. Mofiat for use as the name of the true God, as it now stands in the 
Sechuana translation of holy Scripture. It was an exotic word and seemed 
equivalent to the U)~\D cited by Mr. Girdlestone from Isaiah, &c.. Mo- in 
the Sechuana word being a prefix. — H. G. T.] 
3. Ahiman is connected by you with “ manu.'’ It is observable that the 
same name is given to a temple-porter after the Captivity, 1 Chr. Lx. 17. 
Would a Levitical porter fresh from the Babylonian Captivity be named after 
the Babylonian god of fate ? I doubt it ; and I prefer the old derivation. 
[It is curious to find among these porters Talm-on and Alchiman: comp, two 
of the sons of Anak, Talm-ai and Ahhimau. — H. G. T.] 
4. I am inclined to quarrel with you for your suggestion concerning 
Melchizedek, and I know not by what authority you call zebul a height 
rather than a habitation. [See Cheyne, Isaiah, vol. ii. 155, and Mr. Cheyne’s 
remarks above. — H. G. T.] 
The name Bath-sheba I should connect with the secondary meaning of 
Sheba — an oath — rather than with the primary. Your reference to Aziz 
reminds me of Azaz-el, the so-called scape-goat. Comp, the name Azaz in 
1 Chr. V. 8, and the names Uzza, Uzziah, Uzziel, «S:c.; see also Ps. xxiv. 8, 
where Jehovah is called T-ITV. ; also note the expression in Daniel — “the god 
of Forces ” (Dan. xi. 38). Was the Nabathiean Aziz a god, or an attribute ? 
[a “divinity of Syro- Phoenician origin” — Pierret, Petit Man. de Mythol, 100] ; 
and may not the same question be raised concerning Bam, Zedek, and other 
so-called gods ? [Zedek (Sydyk) took to wife one of the Tanides, and his 
son was Asclepios. He was one of the two who found out the use of salt. 
So says Philo Byblius. See Lenormant, Les Origines, &c., 541, 545. — H. G. T.] 
5. On p. 9 you refer to Sekhem. What is your objection to the traditiona 
spelling Shechem, and to the topogTaphical and descriptive sense shoulder, 
or nape of the neck between the shoulders, so applicable to the position of 
Shechem. Your reference to the Egyptian meaning of the word adds new 
interest to Gen. xlviii. 22 ; where see the rendering in the lxx. [I do not 
know that we are tied to the diacritic point. Dr. Ebers writes (AEg. u. d. B. 
Mos., 231) : “We hazard a comparison between the Egjq)tian and the 
Samaritan Sechem, CIKIJULA., which, as Ewald has already 
proved, possessed an old-Canaanitish population, who adhered to Baal 
Berith.” As to spelling, I like kh, for it avoids the risk of the soft ch in the 
mouth of the reader, as in French. It is Dr. Ebers who compares the 
Egyptian Pa-sekhem. I was familiar with Dean Stanley’s “ shoulder ” of 
the mountain, but it is worth while to consider the alternative of “sanctuary,” 
as in Egyptian : see my paper on “Joseph,” Tr. Viet Inst,xv. 86. — H. G. T.l 
19 
