Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re[4]: Hebrew & Aramaic again (Peter)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: peter_kirk AT sil.org
  • To: <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re[4]: Hebrew & Aramaic again (Peter)
  • Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 18:57:38 -0400


Do you have the Greek text of Josephus at hand? I know that in English
"common" can mean "vulgar", but can the word which Josephus used here
mean that, or does he mean (as I assumed) that knowledge of Greek was
widespread, even or especially among the lower classes? Of course the
Romans in Palestine would have needed Greek-speaking servants, and
would-be servants might have learned Greek in the hope of getting a
plum job with a senior Roman.

Re a point in your other posting on this topic: I would suppose that
Pilate spoke in Greek, the most widely spoken language in the eastern
part of the empire (and actually also in Rome) at the time. I would
suppose that most of his audience understood at least the basics of
what he said. He may also have had an interpreter; I would guess there
would be some evidence somewhere if that was a widespread practice in
the Roman empire. Most conquerors assume that their subject peoples
understand the language of the empire, if they don't, that's their
problem! Anyway, as you said, Herod had promoted Greek culture and
language. You seem to be suggesting that all Jews who learned Greek
became monolingual, forgetting all their Hebrew and/or Aramaic and
cutting themselves off from their families and the surrounding
community. Possible, but unlikely. More likely there was a spectrum of
bi- and trilingualism in the city, with some monolingual speakers of
each of the three languages but with most people have some degree of
competence in two or three languages. I accept that this may not be
provable (especially if you reject such evidence as mine from
Josephus) any more than the date and authorship of the writings of
Josephus, but sometimes one has to accept things as probable short of
actual concrete proof.

I'm afraid your evidence from the library doesn't help at all as we
are thinking primarily of biligualism in spoken language, or at least
I thought we were. I can provide many modern examples of people who
are totally bilingual in spoken language but can only read and write
in one of the languages, because the other has no orthography or its
orthography is not used in that particular place, or simply because
the people have had formal education in only one of the languages they
know.

An Estonian who watches and understands Finnish TV has acquired some
degree of bilingualism, which is not hard as the languages are quite
similar. I guess the Estonians who are now pouring into Finland
understand quite well when Finns talk to them, but have trouble making
themselves understood to Finns. That sort of one-sided bilingualism
could of course have happened in ancient times also, though not for
the same reason. I would guess that many Jews who could understand
Greek quite well would speak it very badly.

Peter Kirk

PS As for your back burner point, we can only make progress when we
agree the criteria to be used for judging the dating of Josephus as
well as Ezra and 1 Esdras. The book of Ezra and Josephus' works both
present themselves as in part the first person reminiscences, complete
with historical setting and specific dating, of a person unknown
outside these texts. If this is sufficient evidence to date Josephus'
works in the late 1st century AD, it is also sufficient evidence to
date Ezra in the 5th century BC.


______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Re[3]: Hebrew & Aramaic again (Peter)
Author: mc2499 AT mclink.it at internet
Date: 17/07/1999 16:48


Dear Peter,

You wrote:

>While looking at Josephus in answer to the other division of this
>thread, I came across the following in Josephus AJ book 20 chapter 11
>section 2:
>
>"our nation does not encourage those that learn the languages of many
>nations, and so adorn their discourses with the smoothness of their
>periods; because they look upon this sort of accomplishment as common,
>not only to all sorts of free-men, but to as many of the servants as
>please to learn them."
>
>Thus Josephus is saying that some knowledge of Greek was common among
>the Jews of his period,

On the contrary he says that such learning is scorned upon, ie common. He
doesn't say such knowledge is widespread. There were however Jewish Greek
speaking communities. Herod was a great proponent of Greek culture and
founded a number of Greek cities.

>in fact more so among the common people than
>among the intellectual elite. Clear evidence for bilingualism, with a
>rather interesting slant to it.

Not at all, though there were clearly monolingual speakers of Greek as the
Babatha library implies: these are mainly personal letters.

In the end I think the hypothesis of bilingualism is unverifiable,
therefore functionally meaningless. (This is not to say that I totally
negate the possibility of bilingualism in a multi-language society.)


Cheers,


Ian

(I notice the subject which interests me, ie Ezra/Josephus/1 Esdras has
been put on the backburner.)


---
You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: Peter_Kirk AT sil.org
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page