Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Deborah Millier <deborahmillier AT yahoo.com>]

Dear List members,

The following is an as-brief-as-I-can-make-it survey
of the evidence I know of that Hebrew flourished as a
*spoken* language during the second temple period.  It
is basically lifted from a few main sources (there is
a bibliography at the end of my survey, but most of
the info comes directly from Buth’s, Lundy’s, and
Wise’s work).  I will start with the general and
suggestive, then move to the more specific.  It is the
cumulative effect of the data that I trust will
persuade those still harboring doubts that Hebrew was
indeed alive and well--and spoken in Judea and the
Galilee--until sometime in the late 2nd century C.E.:

1. While LBH (Late Biblical Hebrew) continued as a
written language, the usual signals for the “death” of
a language were conspicuously absent (e.g. vastly
increased numbers of loan words, loss of morphological
integrity, etc.).

2. Literary evidence of the times (200 B.C.E.-135
C.E.) suggests that authors continued to shape the
classical idiom to serve new needs, coining neologisms
and developing obviously new varieties of the written
language.

3. “Slips” in the written form of the language at this
time signal that the spoken language of the authors
was developing into a form different than LBH and
approaching MH (Mishnaic Hebrew).

4. The vast majority of the DSS were written in LBH. 
Of particular interest are the Copper Scroll (i.e. a
list of temple treasures) and 4QMMT, the latter being
what appears to be a personal letter written in LBH.

5. Ben Sira and 1 Maccabees, as well as a substantial
percentage of the “apocryphal” and “pseudepigraphic”
literature were all preserved in LBH.

6. The finds at Masada (c. 66-74 C.E.), including jar
handles, and an ostracon used as a receipt reading
MIYRUSHALAYIM, plus numerous other ostraca inscribed
in paleo-script and serving unknown functions, were
all written in Hebrew.

7. Items discovered in the “Cave of Letters” and in
some neighboring caves in nearby wadis, yielded three
MH contracts from En Gedi and five letters in MH
written to Bar Kokhba by subordinates during the
second uprising against the Romans (c. 132-135 C.E.).

8. The burial ostracon from the “Cave of Horrors”
read: SHAUL BEN SHAUL, SHALOM.  (A promissory note and
four other ostraca used as receipts, likewise
discovered in the Judean Wilderness are too
fragmentary for us to be certain whether or not they
are MH or Aramaic).

9. The finds from Murabba’at, all either undated or
dated to the time of the second uprising (132-135
C.E.), included six contracts in MH, seven legible MH
letters to Bar Kokhba, and four more poorly preserved
letters that may very well be MH also.

10. Two sepulchral inscriptions from near Jerusalem
(i.e. the Ben Khezir inscription and the famous
“L’BEIT DAVID” inscriptions) were both written in MH. 
Added to this is the so-called “Trumpet inscription”
that apparently came from the southwest corner of the
Herodian temple.  Even several of the Aramaic tomb
inscriptions contained Hebrew titles for the deceased
(e.g. COHEN HA-GADOL; NAZIR).

11. Numismatic (coin) evidence, from the time of John
Hyrcanus I (134-104 B.C.E.) and running down to the
time of Antigonus (40-37 B.C.E.), supports at least an
official usage of Hebrew.  After both the first (66-70
C.E.) and second (132-135 C.E.) revolts against the
Romans, Jewish coins were minted with Hebrew mottos,
using paleo-Hebrew script.

BRIEF SUMMARY THUS FAR:

Formal written materials and virtually all literary
texts utilized LBH.  This seems to witness a
learned-class Hebrew, with the Murabba’at contracts
and their subscribers, although coming from Judean
villages, nevertheless handling large amounts of
money, thus probably pointing once more to upper
classes such as village elders or propertied families.
 Likewise this can be said about the sepulcher
inscriptions since the wealthy were the ones who could
afford such eternal monuments.  Hebrew was used for
letters and contracts, as well as for HALAKHIC
discussions (e.g. MISHNA), where the topic was sacred.
 Furthermore, matters related to the temple and
national identity tended to be written in Hebrew, with
Aramaic influences often apparent.

These observations apply only to the region of Judea,
however.  The Galilee area is more difficult to
assess, due in part to less literary evidence and
because settlement patterns were substantially
different there, particularly after the Bar Kokhba
revolt.  At that time, Judea was essentially
depopulated and many Jews moved north to the Galilee,
bringing with them (no doubt) their linguistic habits.
 Thus it is difficult to determine what the Hebrew
usage was like there before then.

CONTINUING WITH THE SURVEY:

12. In Aristea’s letter (200-100 B.C.E.) Demetrius is
quoted speaking to the king thus:

“Translation is needed [for the Hebrew Scriptures]…. 
They [Jews] are assumed to use Aramaic [SYRIAKE], but
such is not the case; it [the language of the Jews] is
a different [ETEROS] kind [of language]” 

We know that Demetrius, and hence the writer of
Aristea’s letter, refer to Hebrew and not Aramaic
because the books in question were from the Hebrew
Bible.

13. In the countryside of Judea decrees of marriage
were written in Hebrew while in more cosmopolitan
Jerusalem they were composed in Aramaic (Ketubot
4:12).

14. Traders and Babylonians wanting to communicate
better with Jerusalemites learned Hebrew (Yoma 6:4, B
Pesakhim 116).  Presumably they already knew Aramaic.

15. In one telling recorded instance, some students of
Yehudah Ha-Nasi, the compiler of the MISHNA who lived
in Tziporri in the Galilee (c. 200 C.E.), could not
figure out the meaning of a few Hebrew words so they
asked the maid, who explained the words to them (B.
Megillah 18).  This lends evidence that Hebrew was
still alive among at least some of the more common
people in the Galilee region at this time.

16. Targumim were not so much translations of the
Bible to explain the “lesser-known” Hebrew, but
repositories of exegetical traditions.  Because of
this they had value to Hebrew speakers (also fluent in
Aramaic), but were always distinguished from the
biblical text itself.  The congregational “translator”
of a targum (itself a kind of translation) reading was
called a METURGEMAN, but the sermons following the
Scripture readings were, in the second temple period,
given in Hebrew.  To the common people.

17. The Pharisees utilized Hebrew (not Aramaic) for
their *oral* transmissions of their traditions.  They
found popularity (except for details on tithing and a
few other minutia) among the common people—and were
apparently understood.

18. The structure of the Magnificat (Luk. 1:46-55)
shows that it came from a Hebrew, not Aramaic, source,
and that it is not merely a lukan composition based on
the LXX.  If it came from Mary’s own mouth then she
could compose beautiful Hebrew poetry.  If it came
from a later Christian community, then they too were
capable of producing exceptional poetry in Hebrew. 
Evidence of a living language.

19. The evidence of Aramaic in the Gospels does not
prove that Hebrew was no longer widely used.  In fact,
some words attributed to Aramaic are just as likely to
have been good MH (e.g. ABBA).

20. Jesus’ many references to someone (himself?) as
“the son of man,” an obvious allusion to the enigmatic
BAR ENOSH figure in Dan. 7, does not necessarily
signal that he was communicating to the masses in
Aramaic, since he just as easily could have been
teaching in Hebrew (standard rabbinic practice of the
time) and speaking the “son of man” title in Aramaic.

21. Luke’s portrayal of Paul as speaking EBRAIDI no
longer poses a problem if one accepts that Hebrew was
indeed spoken at the time in Judea (Act. 22:2).  In
fact, SYRISTI would be the most common way in Greek to
refer to Aramaic.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1) Hebrew certainly was vibrantly alive as a literary
language during the second temple period, particularly
in Judea.

2) Hebrew was also certainly utilized by some among
the scholarly and upper classes, and even among the
less-learned as a spoken language.  Again,
particularly in Judea.

3) In the Galilee, Aramaic was probably the most
common tongue to converse in, except when religious
discourse was going on. 

SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bendavid, Abba. 1967. Leshon miqra ulshon hakhmim, 2nd
ed. Tel Aviv:Dvir.

Black, Matthew. 1967. An Aramaic approach to the
Gospels and Acts, 3rd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Buth, Randall. 1984. Hebrew poetic tenses and the
Magnificat. Journal for the study of the New
Testament, 21.67-83.
--1987. Language use in the first century: the place
of spoken Hebrew in a trilingual society.  Notes on
scripture in use, special issue 1.25-42. Dallas:
Summer Institute of Linguistics.
--1990. Jesus’ most important title. Jerusalem
Perspective, 3(2). 11—15.

Cook, Edward. 1986. Sociolinguistics and the languages
of Jesus. Paper read at the 19th national meeting of
the Society of Biblical Literature.

Grintz, J.M. 1960. Hebrew as a spoken and written
language in the last days of the second temple period.
Journal of Biblical Literature, 79.32-47.

Lund, Jerome A. The language of Jesus. 1993. Mishkan,
17/18. 139-55.

Meyers, Eric M., and James F. Strange. 1981.
Archaeology, the rabbis, and early Christianity.
Nashville: Abingdon.

Morag, Shlomo. 1966. Ad matay dibbru ivrit? Leshonenu
le-am, 67/68:3-10.

Rabin, Chaim. 1976. Hebrew and Aramaic in the first
century. In The Jewish people in the first century,
vol. 2, 1007-39. Ed. By S. Safrai and M. Stern.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Safrai, Shmuel. 1990. The Jewish cultural nature of
Galilee in the first century. Immanuel, 24/25.147-86.
--1991a. The spoken languages in the time of Jesus.
Jerusalem Perspective, 4/1.3-8, 13.
--1991b. The literary languages in the time of Jesus.
Jerusalem Perspective, 4/2.3-8.

Safrai, Ze’ev. 1990. The origins of reading the
Aramaic targum in synagogue. Immanuel, 24/25.187-93.

Wise, Michael O. 1992. Languages of Palestine. In
Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Ed. By J. Green
and S. McKnight. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press.
----------------------------------------------------

KOL TUV LAKHEM,
-- Michael Millier


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com