Lenormant, _Essai sur la propagation de l’Alphabet phénicien dans l’ancien monde_, ed. 2, Paris 1875, I. p. 25. Footnote 612: W.D. Whitney, _Language and the Study of Language_, London 1867, p. 169; cf. F. von Hellwald, _Culturgeschichte_, p. 154. Footnote 613: Hellwald, _ibid._, p. 482. Footnote 614: Movers, _Die Phönizier_, II. 2. 439 _et seq._ Footnote 615: _Histoire générale des langues sémitiques_, p. 200. Footnote 616: See my _Studien über Tanchûm Jeruschalmi_, Leipzig 1870, p. 12. Footnote 617: _Die Semiten in ihrem Verhâltniss zu Chamiten und Japheiten_, Basel 1872, p. 134. Footnote 618: This question will be found very satisfactorily discussed in Stade’s article ‘_Erneute Prüfung des zwischen dem Phönicischen und Hebräischen bestehenden Verwandtschaftsverhältnisses_,’ in the _Morgenländische Forschungen_, Leipzig 1875, pp. 169–232. Footnote 619: See Merx, _Archiv. f. wissensch. Erforsch. d. A. T._ pt. 1. 1867, p. 108. Footnote 620: In late Aramaised Hebrew we find the feminine kehantâ (= kôheneth) for a Priest’s Wife, equivalent to êsheth kôhên; see Levy, _Chald. Wörterb._ I. 356 _a_. It comes thence to be used in a general signification, of an honest, irreproachable woman, in opposition to pundâḳîth, properly an innkeeper, in _Mishnâ Yebhâmôth_, XVI. 7. Footnote 621: See Ernst Meier’s essay on the former in _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1865, XIX., and Nathan Davis, _Carthage and her remains_, London 1861. Footnote 622: _Die geschichtlichen Bücher des A. T._, Leipzig 1866. Footnote 623: _Bibelkritisches_, in the _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1873, XXVII. 682–89, especially the theses 22–26. Zunz appears to have laboured independently of Graf, but arrives at almost the same results. Footnote 624: Bargés, who has earned great credit for his elucidation of the Marseilles table in several writings, disputes the authenticity of the inscription discovered by Davis (_Examen d’une nouvelle inscription phénicienne découverte récemment dans les ruines de Carthage et analogue à celle de Marseille._ Paris 1868). Footnote 625: _History of Israel_, II. 360. Footnote 626: _Geschichte der Juden_, Leipzig 1874, I. 407 _et seq._ Footnote 627: See Stade’s exhaustive exposition in the _Morgenländische Forschungen_, p. 197. But I cannot share the opinion of my respected friend, that the Hebrews could borrow nothing from the Phenicians because the two nations passed through a completely distinct religious and political development. Footnote 628: _Shefaṭ-ʿAdad_ in Nabatean, quoted by Ernst Meier in _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._ 1873, XVII. 609, is also problematical. Footnote 629: Duncker, _Geschichte des Alterthums_, I. 371. Footnote 630: The data belonging to this subject are lucidly brought together in Kuenen’s _Religion of Israel_, I. 182. Footnote 631: _Semiten, Chamiten und Japhetiten_, p. 160 _et seq._ Footnote 632: