S HUBAL = HA-BAAL? AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ENQUIRY Nehls says:
Interesting is the name HUBAL (in Arabic and Hebrew script the vowels were not noted). This shows a very suspicious connection to the Hebrew HABAAL (= the Baal). As we all know this was an idol mentioned in the Bible (Num. 25:3, Hosea 9:10, Deut. 4:3, Josh. 22:17 and Ps. 106:28-29).
In fact, such an argument, albeit in a more sophisticated way was also made by Sergio Noja.[26] Noja hypothesis can be summarized like this. Hubal consists of hbl (ھُبَل). The h- or hn- article in Ancient North Arabian was the forerunner of the al- of Arabic. As for bl, it was modified with time from b'l (بَعْل). With the loss of 'ayn in the middle of b and l, b'l became bl. Furthermore, since ha-b'l means "the lord", or "the god" (Ba'al was an ancient Canaanite deity) and in classical Arabic it can be written as al-b'l which would still mean the same thing. Hubal would, therefore, be the ancient correspondent of Allah.
Noja's argument, seductive as it appears, has some serious problems. The inscriptions in the Arabian peninsula can be classified into two groups according to the form of definite article used: h- or hn- on the one hand and on the other 'l-, the precursor of classical Arabic al-.[27] Chronologically speaking, the latter group is regarded as late, since its epigraphic evidence dates only from late 1st century BCE onwards and have been found in central, north and eastern Arabia, Syria and the Negev region. The former group, on the other hand, is evidenced from the middle of the 1st century BCE.
However, the al- group appears to be more ancient as Herodotus stated that the Arabs worshipped a goddess name Alilat, Al-ilat (or Allat, "the goddess").[28] This tells us that this form of Arabic definite article was used as early as the 5th century BCE. However, this does not give us any idea about the dialect in which such an article was used.[29] The idea that the h- or hn- article found in Ancient North Arabian is the ancestor of Arabic 'l- has been suggested by scholars over a long period.[30] This view has come under criticism due to the lack of epigraphic evidence for the transformation of h- or hn- to Arabic 'l-.[31] Theoretically, it can be argued that it could have happened in a number of ways, the problem always come back to the lack of epigraphic evidence for the actual process.[32] Noja assumed a similar transformation from the Ancient North Arabian h- to Arabic 'l-.[33] Not surprisingly, he did not furnish any proof either.
Moreover, for the name b'l to become bl with the loss of 'ayn, it would have to have been transmitted through a language such as Akkadian or Punic in which the 'ayn had disappeared. This would give in Akkadian Bel and in Punic Bol. Both forms were present at Palmyra, but Palmyrene does not use the Ancient North Arabian definite article h- or hn-. Since the word b'l, with the 'ayn, exists in Arabic as a common noun, and as the name of a pre-Islamic idol, it would be very difficult to argue that Arabic had received the word or name by this route, let alone why it had been given an Ancient North Arabian definite article.
Those have insisted that according to Islamic sources Hubal was brought from Moab to Arabia. Moab is situated on the east side of the Dead Sea, which is now a part of Jordan. What does the archaeology from this region tells us about Hubal and Ba'alshamin which originated from Ba'al? To examine this, let us turn our attention to the Nabataean inscriptions in Arabia, Jordan and Syria where the deities Hubal and Ba'alshamin are mentioned.
Figure 1: Nabataeans and their trade routes.[34]
The god Hubal, whose name is known from early Arabian sources, was also known apparently to the Nabataeans. Hubal in a Nabataean inscription dated to c. 1 BCE / CE from Mada'in Salih (Hijr or Hegra, Figure 1), north-west of Madinah, appears as hblw. The final -w is typical of Nabataean divine and personal names. The inscription is funerary in character and Hubal's name appears with Dushara and Manōtu (i.e., Manat). The inscription reads: