Biblical Hebrew Forum

[fred burlingame <tensorpath AT gmail.com>]

Hello Yigal:

My point is simple. The alphabet writing system did not arise in, or out
of, a vacuum. Rather, the precedent hieroglyph/cuneiform writing system (of
the nile and euphrates river valleys), gave birth to the alphabet writing
system, circa 1500 b.c. This date and process represent a significant point
of the first order, to me anyhow (and I believe to many others also).

A subsidiary point that I have just begun to think about involves the
intended consumer of the hieroglyph/cuneiform writing system. That writing
system was assuredly not intended for consumption by 99 percent of the
population. I wonder whether its descendant, the alphabet writing system,
enjoyed a similarly restricted consumer base, at least in the formative
stages of the "child."

I further observe that the new thread you began on this subject suggests the
southern levant initially resisted an alphabet or other writing system.
Hence, the 12th century b.c., ugaritic documents from the northern levant,
do not imply similar writing system in the south at that time.
I reference the Isaiah scroll only as an example of the type of document
that would evidence a mature writing system. Graffiti or an inscription such
as at siloam would not qualify as evidence that the writing system had
matured into literary use.

The two prospective archaeological sites that you inquired about I identify
below. I believe both represent rich sources of archaeological facts about
this list's language.

a. jabal al lawz

 http://anchorstone.com/gallery/albums/mtsinai/normal_2a.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jabal_al-Lawz

b. temple mount

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Mount

If you acquire the digging permit, I will bring the shovel .... :)
regards,

fred burlingame

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>wrote:

> Hi Fred,
>
>
>
> I still don't really get your point. I assume that you do not think that
> anyone is claiming that Isaiah, or any other book of the Bible, was written
> around 1500. And again, the difference between writing in an alphabet and
> writing in hieroglyphs or cuneiform is largely technical. Ugarit shows that
> an alphabet was used for quite long and complex compositions as early as
> 1400. There is no reason to assume that southern Canaanites did not have
> equally complex compositions in their alphabet, but alas, none have been
> found. I'd love to know where you think it likely that such compositions
> might still be hidden - who knows, it may be possible to get there.
>
>
>
> Yigal Levin
>
>
>