deuteronomy, liz, response

Peter Kirk Peter_Kirk at
Sat Mar 10 10:44:22 EST 2001

I would surmise that after a certain date copyists took extreme care not to
modernise the orthography, perhaps because they developed a very high view
of Scripture, that no letter may be changed. This is in fact more than a
surmise, for we know that later on such a view was held, and we also know
that the texts were not all modernised to orthographic uniformity. I won't
try to speculate on dates, though the name Ezra springs to mind.

Peter Kirk

-----Original Message-----
From: Giuseppe Regalzi [mailto:regalzi at]
Sent: 09 March 2001 18:08
To: Biblical Hebrew
Subject: Re: deuteronomy, liz, response

Peter Kirk wrote:

> Well, don't forget the point made recently that the surface form
> of such details indicated not the original composition but the
> latest redaction. So Vince's observation need mean no more than
> that Deuteronomy was copied by a scribe "ca.600" who modernised
> the orthography, whereas Kings was not copied at that time or
> copied by a more conservative scribe.

But subsequently both were copied many times: how is it that they
didn't undergo any more orthographic modernizations?



Giuseppe Regalzi
Via dei Velieri, 83
00121 ROMA RM
regalzi at
Resources for Jewish Studies:

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list