The present study deals with the Nabataean economy in the light of archaeological evidence. It depends on some limited historical sources, epigraphy, published data from archaeological excavations and surveys and new data published for the first time after a survey conducted by the author in Bayda, five kilometres north of Petra, Jordan. The study is divided into three chapters. The first chapter is concerned with Nabataean trade, both at local and international levels. This chapter includes a discussion on the Nabataean trade routes, maritime commerce, Nabataean legal and commercial documents, markets and commodities. In addition, this chapter contains a study of the Nabataean metrological system and relevant aspects of Nabataean numismatics. In the second chapter Nabataean agriculture is analysed. The study tries to illuminate further the role of this component in the formation of the Nabataean economy. The study concentrates particularly on the Nabataean agricultural installations, broadly speaking, the wine and olive presses which have been found at certain sites in Nabataea. They are dealt with in terms of their geographical distribution, capacities and other statistical and economic analyses. This study is followed by descriptive, typological and quantitative accounts of wine production at Bayda in particular. In the final chapter diverse industries are listed and discussed. These include: mining, bitumen, perfume, textiles, carpentry and leather industries. These three chapters are followed by general conclusions and appendices including maps, tables, models, figures and plates.

The thesis presents a summary and an analysis of the Tar i h-i Ebu'[-Feth ("History of the Conqueror") by the Ottoman historian Tursun Bey. The History covers the period 1444-1488, with the bulk of it obviously devoted to the reign of Mehmed II "the Conqueror" (1451-1481). The thesis is in three chapters. The first analyses Tursun Bey's elaborate literary style and also examines the origins of his style, demonstrating that its literary ancestry goes back to thirteenth-century Iran, in particular to luvaini's Tarikh-i Jihangushiz ("History of the World Conqueror") (1252-1280), and can be traced through the Persian Histories by Vassaf (about 1328) and the Timurid historian Nizam aI-Din Shami (before 1402) and Sharaf aI-Din 'Ali Yazdi (1404). The chapter shows that Tursun Bey acquired mastery of this style not simply through studying these Persian prototypes to his History, but also through long employment in the Ottoman Chancery. It is -clear that during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries the Ottomans adopted many of the administrative forms of Ilkhanid Iran and provided models for the formulation of Ottoman administrative and diplomatic documents. Tursun Bey was able to transfer the skill in insa which he acquired in the Chancery to the composition of his History. The second chapter attempts to identify the sources which Tursun Bey used in composing the Introduction to his History: "On the people's need for the Noble Being of the Padi~ah, the Shadow of God". The only written source which Tursun Bey himself identifies is the Akhliiq-i Nii$iri of Na~ir aI-Din Tiisi (1235), although he appears also to have used the Chahiir Maqiilah of Nizami-i 'Ariidi (1156). His most important oral source was his patron, the Grand Vizier Mabmiid Pa~a (? - 1474), who in some respects emerges as the hero of the whole work. The chapter also shows how, in context and style, the Introduction draws on the tradition of 'Mirrors for Princes' literature. The final chapter gives a summary and analysis of the History itself. The first section of the ch(\p.t er outlines the principles which have been followed . in making the summary translation. In the text following each section of the summary, there is a commentary which attempts to identify Tursun Bey's sources and analyse his interpretation of events. The chapter also has footnotes comparing Tursun Bey's historical information with the equivalent passages in the works of other contemporary historians, in order to establish, as far as possible, a correct account of events.

This is a study and an edition of al-Tanbih wa'l-iclam fi mustafadi 'l-qudati wa l-hukkam by Abu Abd Allah Muhammad b. Abd Allah al-Yafrani known as al-qadi al-Miknai (d. 917/1511), a Moroccan scholar living in Fes during the last stages of the Merinid dynasty. The work is composed of two main parts: The first represents an editorial introduction in which a detailed study has been made in order to bring to light both the author and his book, focusing on the author's identity including his lineage as well as his scholarly life and career. In addition, we have set up a general picture of the political and intellectual environment in Morocco during the author's life time. With regard to the primary text, our study has sought to provide a description of the manuscript copies, a brief overview of the subject matter, and a consideration of the structure of the text and its sources from Maliki fiqh. We have also aimed to consider the author's treatment of his chosen topics. Observations of the edited work and some features of its importance as a contribution to the Maliki fiqh field are also offered. The general footnotes to the Arabic text, made in English along with the glossary of legal terms and phrases, and a bibliography are provided in this section. The second section is comprised of the primary text al-Tanbih wa 'l-icam which has been transcribed into typed form to make it more accessible to the reader, but remains in keeping with the original structure of the text. It is numbered in Arabic numerals and includes editorial footnotes which mark the differences between the manuscript copies. Chapters and sub chapters are clearly outlined, while indices of Qur'anic verses, prophetic traditions, persons and geographical names are located at the end of this section.

No description available.

No description available.

Eric Von Hippel. / Author's name handwritten on t.p. / Includes bibliographical references.

This thesis departs from the traditional historiographical views that portray Philby as having no political influence either while he was serving his country or after his resignation from government service when he was settled in Saudi Arabia. It also departs from picturing him as a man who tended to undermine British policy, arguing that he was loyal to his country, as was plain during his years of service. The thesis examines his background, from his early years to the work he did for his country in India, Iraq and Transjordan and takes an analytical and historical approach. It seeks to present a more comprehensive understanding of Philby’s mission to Arabia, its objectives and outcomes, focusing on his political work in Arabia and his efforts to solve problems which otherwise might have threatened British interests. This thesis deals with Philby’s efforts in the conflict between Najd and Hejaz and his actions in the border dispute between Ibn Sa‘ūd and his rival, Hussain, and assesses whether Philby played a major part in the collapse of the Hejazi kingdom. It considers Philby’s contribution to the American recognition of Saudi Arabia. It examines Philby’s method of settling political conditions after the Idrisi revolt against Ibn Sa‘ud. It asks why Philby visited Yemen and if it would somehow have enhanced Ibn Sa‘ūd’s position. It focuses on Philby’s role in the Buraimi crisis between Britain and Saudi Arabia and illustrates the persuasive arguments by which Philby upheld the Saudi opposition to Britain’s demands over Buraimi.

This dissertation proposes that Deuteronomy portrays the role of divine paternity in three dimensions; progenitor, caregiver, and covenant partner. After presenting the history of the research in chapter 1, this study recognizes that the fatherhood of God in Deuteronomy had been largely overlooked. Recognizing the phrase, "God is a father," to be metaphorical, this study presents a discussion on metaphorical theory in order to understand how metaphors work. Max Black's theory of interaction is accepted as a framework to understanding Deuteronomy's metaphor, "God is a father." Chapter 3 presents an overview of fatherhood from the perspective the ANE. The purpose of the chapter is to establish a system of associated commonplaces concerning the word "father" in the ANE, which, in turn, helps modern readers understand the phrase, "God is a father." This study investigates the literary and theological context of Deuteronomy 32, 1, 8, and 14 (in that order) where the fatherhood of God is revealed. Subsequently, it discusses the structure and genre of each chapter. Finally, it analyzes the verses in their context that speak of God as the father of Israel (Deut 32:6, 18; 1:31; 8:5; 14:1-2). Chapter 4 logically begins with Deuteronomy 32, for there it reveals Yahweh as the progenitor of Israel. Moreover, it is the only occurrence in Deuteronomy where the word "father" is used metaphorically for Yahweh. Deuteronomy 1 reveals Yahweh as caregiver , as he is compared to an earthly father carrying his son. Deuteronomy 8 continues the caregiving theme in the form of Yahweh disciplining Israel for their refinement and for their good. Deuteronomy 14 presents Yahweh's fatherhood as covenant partner . The chapter also portrays Israel as his son, his holy people, and his special treasure. Israel's role, as son, is to obey Yahweh's commands. The conclusion provides a summary and concluding thoughts pertaining to God's fatherhood in Deuteronomy. It affirms that Deuteronomy portrays Yahweh's divine paternity over Israel as progenitor, caregiver, and covenant partner. / This item is only available to students and faculty of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. If you are not associated with SBTS, this dissertation may be purchased from <a href="http://disexpress.umi.com/dxweb">http://disexpress.umi.com/dxweb</a> or downloaded through ProQuest's Dissertation and Theses database if your institution subscribes to that service.

The dissertation examines the foundations of modern Arab national thought in nineteenth-century works of Buṭrus al Bustānī (1819-1883) and Aḥmad Fāris al Shidyāq (1804-1887) in which occurred an intersection of language-making practices and a national pedagogic project. It interrogates the centrality of language for Arab identity formation by deconstructing the metaphor "language is the mirror of the nation," an overarching slogan of the nineteenth century, as well as engaging with twentieth-century discussions of the Arab nation and its Nahḍa. The study seeks to challenge the conventional historiography of Arab thought by proposing a re-theorisation of the Arab Nahḍa as an Enlightenment-Modernity construct that constitutes the problematic of the Arab nation. The study investigates through literature and literary tropes the makings and interstices of the historical Arab Nation: the topography of its making. It covers a series of primary understudied sources: Bustānī's enunciative Nafīr Sūriyya pamphlets that he wrote in the wake of the 1860 civil wars of Mount Lebanon and Damascus: his translation of Robinson Crusoe, dictionary, and encyclopaedia. As well as Shidyāq's fictional autobiography, linguistic essays and treatise, and travel writings on Europe. The dissertation engages with these works to show how the 'Nahḍa' is a constituted by inherently contradictory and supplementary projects. It forms a moment of fracture in history and temporality – as does the Enlightenment in Europe – from which emerges a seemingly coherent national narrative.

Plato thought that dialectic is the method of philosophical inquiry. Yet there is no agreement between scholars regarding Plato\'s view of dialectic. The dominant interpretation, dating back to Robinson\'s Plato\'s Earlier Dialectic, which I call the \"discontinuous\" interpretation (DI), assumes a significant gap between Plato\'s account of dialectic as it is presented in the course of the dialogues. As such, although Plato considered dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry, the term \'Dialectic\' is just a façon de parler conveying the method he deemed most suitable at different moments. One should note that (DI) entails the following trilemma: Plato\'s dialectic, as the method of philosophical inquiry, must be identified with either Elenchus (E), Hypothesis (H) or Collection & Division (C&D). For example, Irwin (1988:7) argues that one should identify dialectic with (E) while Benson (2015:238) argues that one should identify dialectic with (H). In contrast with (DI), the goal of this dissertation is to defend a \"continuous\" interpretation (CI): Plato introduced a unified view of dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry in the Phaedrus. My argument supporting (CI) relies on three main premises: (1) The so-called three methods, (E), (H) and (C&D), are three different procedures of one &#948;&#953;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#954;&#964;&#953;&#954;&#8052; &#964;&#941;&#967;&#957;&#951;; (2) Plato\'s &#948;&#953;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#954;&#964;&#953;&#954;&#8052; &#964;&#941;&#967;&#957;&#951; is both a method of communication and a method of discovering truth; and (3) The Phaedrus (261a-266b) contains Plato\'s unified view of &#948;&#953;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#954;&#964;&#953;&#954;&#8052; &#964;&#941;&#967;&#957;&#951;, conceived as an amalgam of (E), (H) and (C&D), and a method of communication and a method of discovering truth. / Platão pensou que a dialética é o método de investigação filosófica. No entanto, não há consenso entre os estudiosos a respeito da sua visão da dialética. A interpretação dominante, que se remonta ao trabalho de Robinson Plato\'s Earlier Dialectic, que eu chamo de interpretação \"descontínua\" (ID), pressupõe que há uma ruptura na visão de Platão sobre a dialética no decorrer dos seus diálogos. Isto significa que ele considerou a dialética como o método de investigação filosófica, mas o termo \'dialética\' é apenas uma façon de parler para se referir ao método que considerou mais adequado em diferentes momentos. Portanto, (ID) implica o seguinte trilema: Devese identificar a visão de Platão sobre a dialética, enquanto o método de investigação filosófica, com o Elenchus (E), com a Hypotesis (H), ou com a Coleção & Divisão (C&D)? Por exemplo, Irwin (1988: 7) afirma que a dialética deve ser identificada com (E), enquanto Benson (2015: 238) afirma que a dialética deve ser identificada com (H). Em contraste com (ID), o objetivo do presente trabalho é defender uma interpretação \"contínua\" (IC): No Fedro Platão introduz uma visão unificada da dialética como método de investigação filosófica. Meu argumento para defender (IC) está baseado em três premissas: (1) os chamados três métodos, (E), (H) e (C&D) são realmente três procedimentos diferentes de uma &#948;&#953;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#954;&#964;&#953;&#954;&#8052; &#964;&#941;&#967;&#957;&#951;; (2) a &#964;&#941;&#967;&#957;&#951; &#948;&#953;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#954;&#964;&#953;&#954;&#8052; de Platão é o método de comunicação e descoberta da verdade; e (3) o Fedro (261a-266b) contém a visão unificada de Platão sobre a &#948;&#953;&#945;&#955;&#949;&#954;&#964;&#953;&#954;&#8052; &#964;&#941;&#967;&#957;&#951;, concebida como uma amálgama de (E), (H) e (C e D), e o método de comunicação e descoberta da verdade.