[673]. Ṭûr Hârûn, Yâḳût, III. 559; Ḳazwînî, I. 168; see Burckhardt in Gesenius, Thesaurus, p. 392.
[674]. Zeitsch. d. D. M. G., 1862, XVI. 688.
[675]. Burton, Personal Narrative etc., 1st ed. II. 117, or 2nd ed. I. 331.
[676]. Zeitsch. d. D. M. G., l.c. p. 656. On duplicates in Mohammedan and Christian traditions about graves, see Sepp’s article on Samaria and Sichem, (Ausland, 1875, pp. 470–72).
[677]. A mala fides should not be assumed even in the case of inscriptions like those mentioned by Procopius, De Bello Vandalico, V. 2. 13; see Munk’s Palestina, German translation by Levy, p. 193, note 5. They are everywhere old legendary popular traditions, which in later time become fixed by an inscription. From such inscriptions we must distinguish fictitious sepulchral monuments, in which the intention to delude is manifest, e.g. the inscription on the graves of Eldad and Medad, on which see Zunz, l.c. no. 43, p. 167. On Jewish accounts of the burial-places of the ancients Zunz, l.c. pp. 182 and 210, should be consulted.
[678]. Sepp, l.c., II. 269.
[679]. Voyages, I. 205, II. 203. A brief list of graves of prophets which are shown at Tiberias and some other places is given in Yâḳût, III. 512.
[680]. See Gesenius, Thesaurus, p. 141.
[681]. If this means that he belonged to the tribe of Ephraim, it is easy to understand why the author of the Chronicle (1 Chr. IV. 18 et seq.) claims him for the tribe of Levi, when we consider the generally acknowledged Levitical tendency of that late book of history. It would appear to one holding Levitical sentiments impossible that a man who is said to have often offered sacrifices (1 Sam. IX. 13), and to have served in the sanctuary of Shiloh under the High-priest Eli, should have been anything but a Levite.
[682]. Consequently the discarded ת th must be regarded as an inflexion, and shows us that the word has no connexion with Crete.