[b-hebrew] parent & child
leviny1 at mail.biu.ac.il
Sun Jan 23 13:54:38 EST 2011
Isn't it interesting that both Wiki entries were last modified today! Wonder
how that happened.
Anyway, there is no reason to think that Jabal al-Lawz has anything to do
with anything biblical or that there were ever Bronze or Iron Age Canaanites
or Israelites there. As far as the Temple Mount - yes, it is reasonable that
there was a library or archive there. However, considering that the Temple
was burned to the ground twice, not to mention other conqueror over the
ages, plus the extensive renovations done by Herod, plus the wet climate of
Jerusalem, make it very unlikely that any parchment or papyrus has survived.
For comparison, think of the dozens of bullae that were found in the nearby
City of David, which are proof that there was an archive that burned,
causing the clay bullae to harden and survive.
From: fred burlingame [mailto:tensorpath at gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 23, 2011 5:50 PM
To: Yigal Levin
Cc: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] parent & child
My point is simple. The alphabet writing system did not arise in, or out of,
a vacuum. Rather, the precedent hieroglyph/cuneiform writing system (of the
nile and euphrates river valleys), gave birth to the alphabet writing
system, circa 1500 b.c. This date and process represent a significant point
of the first order, to me anyhow (and I believe to many others also).
A subsidiary point that I have just begun to think about involves the
intended consumer of the hieroglyph/cuneiform writing system. That writing
system was assuredly not intended for consumption by 99 percent of the
population. I wonder whether its descendant, the alphabet writing system,
enjoyed a similarly restricted consumer base, at least in the formative
stages of the "child."
I further observe that the new thread you began on this subject suggests the
southern levant initially resisted an alphabet or other writing system.
Hence, the 12th century b.c., ugaritic documents from the northern levant,
do not imply similar writing system in the south at that time.
I reference the Isaiah scroll only as an example of the type of document
that would evidence a mature writing system. Graffiti or an inscription such
as at siloam would not qualify as evidence that the writing system had
matured into literary use.
The two prospective archaeological sites that you inquired about I identify
below. I believe both represent rich sources of archaeological facts about
this list's language.
a. jabal al lawz
b. temple mount
If you acquire the digging permit, I will bring the shovel .... :)
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Yigal Levin <leviny1 at mail.biu.ac.il>
I still don't really get your point. I assume that you do not think that
anyone is claiming that Isaiah, or any other book of the Bible, was written
around 1500. And again, the difference between writing in an alphabet and
writing in hieroglyphs or cuneiform is largely technical. Ugarit shows that
an alphabet was used for quite long and complex compositions as early as
1400. There is no reason to assume that southern Canaanites did not have
equally complex compositions in their alphabet, but alas, none have been
found. I'd love to know where you think it likely that such compositions
might still be hidden - who knows, it may be possible to get there.
More information about the b-hebrew