Four for the price of one: Arabs and their language, their kings, Syro-Arabic all in one in the namara inscription

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Apr 17, 2010 at 14:35

This is what you wrote our dear iamjoseph wrote. Right ?

>The reason we have no Arabic writing pre-400 CE

Our dear iamjoseph does not seem to know or care to admit that many Arabs lived in the Syrian desert and Mesopotamia "from time immemorial" and i inlcude here the Lakhmids and the Ghassanids and the likes of the kingdom of the Hira and how come you did not know that our dear iam?

Well let us check the first line iin epigraphy that was found in Namara and in Arabic and it is dated 328CE right mr fake? And here is the first line

li nafs amr' al-qays br 3amru malik al-3arab kuluh dhu asr al-taj

Or : this is for the soul (read this as the tomb) of Amru al-qays the son of Amr king of the Arabs who assumed the crown

Do you know what this means?

1. It means that we have Arabic language before your bogus year 400CE

2. The arabs had kings as this is the tomb of a king

3. Arabs lived in the Syrian desert

4. The word br is Syriac for Arabic bin or ibn which also means that there was always garshouni in Arabic texts just like the Jews of Egypt in late antiquity using Aramaic for khotoba papyri so you think that we should say that there were no jews back then because these papyri were not in Hebrew? now do you see why all you claims seem to be bogus and dogmatic

Now you have 4 for the price of one

Now you either put up or you must pardon me shut up

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".