Though best known for his formative and decisive contributions to the field of Arab-Islamic studies, the Hungarian orientalist Ignaz Goldziher (1850–1921) also had a considerable impact on the field of Jewish studies. His first publication, at the age of twelve, already reveals his interests in the history of Judaism and its prospects in the modern world,1 and his doctoral dissertation, prepared as a teenager working under the supervision of the great H. L. Fleischer (1801–1888) in Leipzig on the thirteenth-century Jewish philologist and exegete Tanḥūm ben Joseph Yerūshalmī,2 already displays its author as “a very distinguished scholarly mind”.3 His first extended monograph dealt with issues concerning the function and importance of mythology among the ancient Israelites,4 and further, with the anti-Semitic and racist theories of European scholars and intellectuals like Ernest Renan (1823–1892).5

The verbal form known as the active participle (= AP) is an integral part of the Mehri verbal system, functioning mainly – but not exclusively – as a future tense.1 Yet despite its frequency, recent synopses of the language have given this form very little attention. For example, in the very important sketch of the Modern South Arabian languages by Johnstone (1975), discussion of the AP is limited to less than one sentence (p. 119). In the very useful set of observations by Lonnet (1994a), the AP receives only a little more consideration, about ten lines. In the more recent outline by Simeone-Senelle (1997), the AP also gets about ten lines. All of this is in contrast to the grammar of Jahn (1905), in which the AP (or future, as Jahn calls it) is treated as a basic verbal tense and is included in all paradigm sets.2

This analysis of certain rock carvings at Jabal Jusasiyah Qatar is in the form of an Archaeological Report, but is not a full Archaeological Survey. This has been carried out by others – (Hans Kapel Arryan, Qatar National Museum Journal, 1983, pp. 1–126) for Jabal Jusasiyah Qatar. A systematic procedure is adopted for the analysis of a number of these petroglyphs at the sites in Qatar.

‘Krishna and Rukmini’ is the title of Amar Citra Kathā comic vol. 516, with artwork by Pratap Mulick. The front page has a muscular Kṛ⋅ṇa gallantly helping an entranced lady mount his chariot. Or is he that gallant? A closer look reveals that Kṛ⋅ṇa is actually grabbing her by the wrist; yet the lady seems more than willing, she is coquettishly lifting her skirt as she mounts the vehicle, and her eyes look adoringly, somewhat naively, at her hero as she smiles coyly. The only hint of opposition is in the background where we see angry mustached warriors coming after them. Is this a case of abduction, or is it better called an elopement?

Maps are graphic interpretations of real or imagined space. Although utilitarian by nature, they are of intrinsic aesthetic and artistic value. In addition to their material qualities, they are constructs of the human mind at a specific time and in a specific culture. Traditionally judged on the basis of their Cartesian rather than artistic qualities, maps are categorised by their spatial accuracy according to a positivist construct. This criterion has recently been re-examined to address mapmaking across cultures and through time. A new definition developed by the History of Cartography Project not only treats maps as material culture, but further broadens the concept of the map to include all artifacts that depict space.1 In this theoretical framework, maps discovered in archaeological contexts are rare artifacts that provide a window into the minds of their makers and users, the way in which space was perceived, as well as the relevance and function of maps in ancient societies. By definition, this is an attempt to address an emic perspective.2