In the article _Ueber die nabathäischen Inschriften von Petra, Hauran u.s.w._, in the _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1860, XIV. 410. Footnote 690: This must not be placed in the same category with cases in which the insertion of [ ] can be explained phonologically (Ewald, _Ausführliches Lehrb. der hebr. Spr_. § 192. _c_; _Böttcher_, I. 286). See the Agadic explanation of this, which I have quoted in the _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1872, XXVI. 769. Footnote 691: The changes of name mentioned in 2 Kings XXIII. 34, XXIV. 17, should also be considered here. It is not probable that these changes were ordered by the Kings of Egypt and of Babylon; for in that case the names received in exchange would have been quite different, Egyptian and Babylonian respectively in form (compare Dan. I. 7). The change of Elyâḳîm into Yehôyâḳîm is especially noticeable, for it is a direct alteration of an Elohistic into a Jahveistic name. Such a change is usually the simple consequence of a religious revolution, as is seen in other cases. Thus, e.g. King Amenophis IV., when he directs his fanaticism against the worship of Ammon, and places that of Aten in the foreground, changes his Ammonic name into _Shu en Aten_, ‘the light of the solar orb.’ See Brugsch, _L’histoire d’Égypte_ (1st ed.), I. 119, and Lenormant, _Premières civilisations_, I. 211. Of Moḥammed also we are told that he altered those portions of his followers’ names which savoured of idolatry, substituting monotheistic terms; thus one ʿAbd ʿAmr had his name changed to ʿAbd al-Raḥmân (Wüstenfeld, _Register zu den genealogischen Tabellen_, p. 27). The pious philologian al-Aṣmaʿî always calls the heathen Arabic poet Imru-l-Ḳeys, Imru Allâh, changing the name of the heathen god Ḳeys into the monotheistic Allâh (Guidi on Ibn Hishâmi’s _Commentary etc._, Leipzig 1874, p. XXI.). Footnote 692: As Pope in the Universal Prayer: ‘Father of all: ... Jehovah, Jove, or Lord!’—TR. Footnote 693: For instance Strauss, in the _Zeitsch. d. D. M. G._, 1869, XXIII. 473. But not only Jahveh, but even Elôhîm was brought from China. The glory of publishing this eccentric idea to the world belongs to M. Adolphe Saïsset, who wrote a whole book, entitled _Dieu et son homonyme_, Paris 1867, to prove very thoroughly that the Elôhîm of Genesis was really—the Emperor of China! The book is 317 octavo pages long. Footnote 694: _Vergelijkende Geschiedenis_, pp. 555, 561. Footnote 695: To this group belongs, on Arabian ground (besides the well-known ʿarrâf and kâhin), the muḥaddath ‘the well-informed;’ on whom see De Sacy’s _Commentary on Ḥarîrî_, 2nd ed., p. 686. Footnote 696: Mommsen, _History of Rome_, edition of 1868, III. 446 _et seq._ Footnote 697: