Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>]

   Karl,
 
   Good point. Thre are thousands of textual
 variations between the DSS and what became the
 Consonantal MT. And scribal mistakes occurred in both
sources.

   Of course, not all texts, in all books, were
found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
 
   BTW, where did you get the program that counts
 occurrences of individual words in the HB?
 
   Uri Hurwitz                                                   Great Neck, 
NY

--- On Sun, 2/6/11, K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com> wrote:


From: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Jerusalem - spelling, in historical perspective
To: "Uri Hurwitz" <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Sunday, February 6, 2011, 10:06 PM


Uri:


On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com> wrote:

  

      Jerusalem is attested in a number of early extra-
biblical sources:

      the well known Egyptian  execration texts, 19th-18th
 centuries BCE;

      the famous El-Amarna tablets in fourteenth century;

      the  boasting of Sennacherib about his  siege of
 Jerusalem in 701 BCE.

    In none of the above is there a Yud between the Lamed
 and Mem.

    Corresoponding with the above, and significant, is the
 fact that  Jerusalem is spelled in the Hebrew bible in
 overwhelming number of cases without a Yud between the
 Lamed and the Mem.



That Jerusalem is spelled without a yod in 622 verses, while with a yod in 
only five, opens the possibility that the inclusion of a yod are copyist 
errors. One way to test that question is to look at the DSS for those five 
verses: Jeremiah 26:18, Esther 2:6, 1 Chronicles 3:5, 2 Chronicles 25:1, 32:9.

…
 Uri Hurwitz                           Great Neck, NY


Karl W. Randolph.