Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>]

On 12/02/2006 01:18, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
> I wrote:
>
>   
> > Huh?  Since when is the assumption that the spelling of Samuel and Kings
> > -- as we have them today! -- are pre-exilic in nature?  Since when is the
> >     
>
> That is, since when is that assumption "standard scholarly reasoning."
>
>   
> > assumption that if a book was composed in pre-exilic times, its current
> > spelling is pre-exilic?
> >     
>
> also "standard scholarly reasoning"?
>
>   
I never took positions, nor suggested that they were "standard scholarly 
reasoning". I clearly stated that the spellings of these books had been 
partially updated after the exile. I also suggested that by careful 
examination of the differences between inscriptional, Samuel/Kings and 
unambiguously post-exilic spelling, it would be possible to study the 
changes in spelling, and particularly how this might vary between names 
and other words, and infer that at least some of the spellings found in 
Samuel/Kings are preserved pre-exilic spellings. For example, if the 
name David is spelling DWD in inscriptions and in Samuel/Kings but DWYD 
in Chronicles, the tentative implication would be that DWD is the 
pre-exilic spelling, and that this mater lectionis was introduced during 
or soon after the exile - which might also suggest that it was 
introduced similarly into other words of similar structure. I also 
suggested that this kind of study would not be circular reasoning but 
would be standard scholarly reasoning, although not unchallengeable if 
good evidence can be provided.

I will reply to your main posting when I have more time.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/