Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>]

On Wednesday 09 November 2005 16:01, Kevin Riley wrote:
> I think the article contains a few badly written sentences.  Someone
> brought up about all the alphabets being descended from the one found. 
> Presumably what is meant is that all the alphabets descend from the
> 'Phoenician' alphabet, of which this is the earliest reliably dated
> example.  Even that may not be entirely what is meant as there are
> abecedary from Sinai and Ugarit that definitely predate this one, even if
> their dating is not so exact.  On the point of the 'drinking vessel' I
> believe what is meant is that this stone vessel held the drink and it would
> have been removed and drunk in smaller containers.  It was the punch bowl
> rather than the cup, if you like.

I like the nephilim explanation better :-D

> While on alphabets, I discovered that the Ugaritic alphabet existed in two
> forms - the 27 letter form used in Ugarit and a 22 letter form used outside
> the town but within Ugaritic controlled territory.  
[snip]

Where did you find this info?

-- 
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"Maybe I'll trade it for a new hat."