b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>
- To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation)
- Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 13:27:31 -0500
Dear Dave,
On Saturday 09 October 2004 08:14, Harold R. Holmyard III wrote:
Dear Karl,
>We don't know when the Damascus Document was authored, but from the
>sounds of it, it was centuries after the last of the Hebrew canon.
HH: The date attributed to it is about the first century B.C.
We're not sure if this date refers to the copies we have preserved or to the
composition of the actual document.
> In other words, at a time when the people on the street spoke
>Aramaic and only the scholars spoke Hebrew more or less fluently
>(much like the medieval monks spoke Latin). Thus it is very likely
>that GDD in the Damascus Document is either an Aramaic loan word or
>a late development of GDWD into a verb.
HH> These ideas that GDD in the Damascus Document is an Aramaic
loanword or a back development from a noun are arbitrary assumptions.
The Damascus Document is a Hebrew document, and GDD is a biblical
word. We don't know that the authors didn't know Hebrew. Quite a lot
of the Dead Sea Scrolls, even the non-biblical material such as
letters, are in Hebrew. Here is a quote about the Dead Sea Scroll
period from _Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation_, by Michael Wise,
Martin Abegg, and Edward Cook:
Hebrew was manifestly the principal literary language for the Jews of
this period. The new discoveries underlined the still living,
breathing, even supple character of that language. A few texts
pointed to the use of Hebrew for speech as well as writing. . . .
Rabbinic Hebrew was shown to be no invention, but simply a
development from the ordinary spoken Hebrew of biblical times.
Um, you have a problem here, HH, because there are no letters in the DSS. All
of the non-biblical material is religious in nature, which to me only
strengthens Karl's statement about Hebrew in that time period. I still
haven't figured out how scholars such as Tov and the three cited above use
material that is exclusively religious (DSS, ossuaries, etc.) to claim that
Hebrew was not an exclusively religious language! Its structure, vocabulary,
etc. was somewhat fluid, yes, I'll give them that. But we have no evidence
whatsoever to show that Hebrew was used "on the street" as it were, or that
there really was such a thing as "ordinary spoken Hebrew" in the
intertestamental period.
HH: I was including the Bar Kochba letters among the Dead Sea Scrolls:
http://articles.jerusalemperspective.com/articles/DisplayArticle.aspx?ArticleID=1606
The Letters
However, the most significant discoveries fell to Prof. Yigael Yadin. On the northern side of the Hever Canyon, he found a cave that had been occupied by supporters of Bar-Kochva seeking refuge from the advancing Roman armies. Apparently among those hiding in the cave - now known as the Cave of Letters - were the two military commanders of nearby Ein-Gedi. A batch of eighteen letters, most of which were from Bar-Kochva's headquarters to these officers before they took refuge in the cave, were found hidden in a water skin. Composed in Aramaic and Hebrew (and in two cases in Greek), all but one of the letters were written on papyrus. The single exception was inscribed on four narrow slats of wood.
The letters, which were written towards the close of the revolt, provide an indispensable insight into the way the country was governed during its three years of independence, and reveal that Bar-Kochva ran an orderly administration with the help of scribes trained in the Hellenistic official procedure. Most of the documents found deal with mobilization orders and supplies.
A number of the letters show Bar-Kochva to be concerned with fulfillment of the commandments, despite the difficult wartime conditions. In an Aramaic letter he orders the commander of a town near Bethlehem to supply the troops in Beitar with the "four species" (date palm frond, myrtle branch, citron and willow branch) needed to celebrate Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles. In another communiqué, written in Hebrew, Bar-Kochva reproaches the commanders of Ein-Gedi for not sending supplies to the front fast enough: "In comfort you sit, eat and drink from the property of the House of Israel, and care nothing for your brothers." The portrait of Bar-Kochva that emerges from Yadin's finds is that of a stern leader who did not tolerate the slightest opposition from his subordinates.
In 1961 Yadin returned to the Cave of Letters for another search. His team once again hit pay dirt, finding five small, tightly rolled papyri. Examination showed the documents to be deeds, three in Hebrew and two in Aramaic. The Hebrew documents clearly were written by an expert scribe, with the script being similar to printed Hebrew used today.
Even though the deeds were drawn up by a professional scribe, they contain a number of colloquialisms causing some scholars to suggest that contrary to popular assumption, Hebrew at the time was a living and developing language. This is also reflected in the economic and military documents found in the Judean Desert. Yadin suggests that Bar-Kochva may have gone as far as making Hebrew the official language of the newly-established Jewish state (Bar-Kokhba, p. 124). The widespread use of Hebrew in the period is confirmed by coins minted during the revolt. All fifty-one different types of coin found from that period have Hebrew inscriptions.
Yours,
Harold Holmyard
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Karl Randolph, 10/07/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation), Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/07/2004
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Karl Randolph, 10/08/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation), Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/08/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Karl Randolph, 10/09/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/09/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Dave Washburn, 10/09/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/09/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Dave Washburn, 10/09/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation), Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/09/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Dave Washburn, 10/09/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/09/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Dave Washburn, 10/09/2004
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Dave Washburn, 10/10/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/10/2004
-
Message not available
- Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation), Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/11/2004
-
Message not available
-
Message not available
- Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation), Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/11/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/10/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Dave Washburn, 10/10/2004
-
Message not available
-
Re: [b-hebrew] GDD (was not: Self-mutilation),
Harold R. Holmyard III, 10/09/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.