TIJ 112.1

TIJ: [z]n ʿbdmkt

Harding (TIJ) interpreted the inscription as saying 'this is ʿAbd-mekkat', upon which Littmann commented: "If ʿbd mkt is correct it is a very interesting name: ʿAbd Mekkat ‘servant of Mekka’ (The Holy City). But an l might be supplied: ʿAbd Malikat" Milik 1958–1959: 355: ʿbdmkt in Harding 112A [=TIJ 112.1] would be "servant of the (king) Malikat". King (1990: 141, n. 11) produced a photograph of the text corrected the reading of the k to a ḥ: "The text is Thamudic D and from a photograph and copy I made in 1986, I would read the text as zn ʿbd mḥ and interpret it as an unfinished love text of the form zn N1 mḥb N2." It is now established that the H-glyph, previously read as a z, is in fact a ʾ and that the inscription begins with the pronoun ʾn 'I'. Moreover, it is clear that the penultimate letter is the E-glyph, which cannot be confused with a k in Thamudic D since the latter takes the shape of a trident (Al-Jallad 2025b). The interpretation of the text is open to debate. The name ʿbd is extremely common and Thamudic D writing formula makes use of the particles mḥb, probably muḥibb, to express the writer's love for another. If this is the correct interpretation, then the b must have been omitted. It is unclear if the t that follows the inscription on another section of the rock is related, but if so, then it is also possible to interpret ʿbd as a female name, producing the feminine participle, mḥ[b]t 'lover of'. If the text is complete, then we have the name ʿbdmḥt, which is attested for the first time. Mḥt is not a known divine epithet and has not appeared in other theophoric compounds. Weighing between both options, it seems safest to err on the side of attested formula and regard this inscription as an incomplete 'love' text as King had suggested.

• TIJ 112