Biblical Hebrew Forum

[George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>]

Please remember to sign all posts with your name, please.


GEORGE ATHAS
Director of Postgraduate Studies,
Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)
Sydney, Australia



From: David Steinberg 
<david.l.steinberg AT rogers.com<mailto:david.l.steinberg AT rogers.com>>
Reply-To: <david.l.steinberg AT rogers.com<mailto:david.l.steinberg AT rogers.com>>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 12:22:03 -0500
To: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com<mailto:kwrandolph AT gmail.com>>, B-Hebrew 
<b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>>
Subject: [b-hebrew] Two High Registers of Post-Exilic Hebrew?

Your recent reply to Karl made some valid points. However, it does
ignore the linguistic complexity of Judea during the period 500 BCE-70
CE ( see http://www.adath-shalom.ca/history_of_hebrew.htm#PostExH ;
http://www.houseofdavid.ca/anc_heb_diglossia.htm#koine_PMH ).

The first thing that should be said is that the culture was overall oral
with real literacy, in the sense of being able to express oneself in
writing, being as low as in contemporary Greece (say 10 percent of the
population) - see Karel van der Toorn, /Scribal Culture and the Making
of the Hebrew Bible /(Harvard University

Press, 2009)


There can be no question, given the evidence at hand, that in Judea -
a) many, almost certainly most, Jews spoke Palestinian Jewish Western
Aramaic. A descendant of a similar northern dialect is found in e.g.
Targum Pseudo-Jonathan
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targum_Pseudo-Jonathan> (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targum_Pseudo-Jonathan ).

b) many Jews spoke Greek either as a first or second language and wrote
in Greek. ( Although a bit later and further north the evidence of Beit
She'arim may be relevant. At Beit She'arim (burial place of the
Sanhedrin in the 2-3 centuries CE) the dominant language of
inscriptions, presumably written by and for the family is Greek. The
following is from /Beth She'arim, vol III The Excavations 1953-1/958 by
N. Avigad (Rutgers U Press, 1976) -

The most prominent feature is the profusion of Greek inscriptions in
contrast to the paucityof Hebrew inscriptions. It emerges that Greek was
the tongue spoken by many Palestinian Jews.... Another interesting fact
is noteworthy: all the men referred to in the Hebrew inscriptions have
Hebrew names (except for one whose name is Greek in form...); whereas
all the women have Greco-Roman names....

c) in many inland localities, peasant and small town Jews spoke a Hebrew
dialect or dialects that later became the new rabbinic literary language
called by the rabbis  leshon Hakhamim and now called in English Mishnaic
Hebrew or Rabbinic Hebrew or Middle Hebrew.

At this time it is clear that several written languages were in use -

a) the Aramaic of Daniel ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_Aramaic
) consciously modelled on the already ancient Imperial Aramaic (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Aramaic#Imperial_Aramaic
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Aramaic#Imperial_Aramaic%20> ).
This would probably have been as incomprehensible to the Aramaic speaker
on the street in 100 BCE as Chaucer's English is to an English speaker
on the street today. We must assume that texts like Daniel were written
by trained scribes for trained scribes. The Archaic language would have
given a patina of ancient truth (see van der Toorn re. scribes writing
for scribes);

b) the Middle Aramaic of (consonantal basis of ) Targum Onkolos. This
was probably an archaising literary dialect still comprehensible to the
Aramaic speaker on the street in the same way that the English of the
Authorized Version is still comprehensible to a reasonably literate
modern English speaker;

c) Post-classical Biblical Hebrew (
http://www.houseofdavid.ca/anc_heb_abb_dia.htm#PCBH
<http://www.houseofdavid.ca/anc_heb_abb_dia.htm#PCBH>) which slowly
developed into the sort of Hebrew we find in most of the Qumran
documents ( http://www.houseofdavid.ca/anc_heb_abb_dia.htm#QH
<http://www.houseofdavid.ca/anc_heb_abb_dia.htm#QH>). This would have
been difficult for a Mishnaic Hebrew speaking peasant to comprehend
though exposure to Torah reading would have given him some grasp of
simple prose Biblical Hebrew. To see how different the two forms of
Hebrew are see Bendavid, Abba,/Biblical Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew/(in
Hebrew), Dvir 1967 (2 volumes) - vol 1. pp. 331-382; vol. 2 pp. 882-924)

d) Proto-Mishnaic Hebrew - we have evidence of this only from the copper
scroll in the period before 70 CE. However, it is likely that it was
used as a non-literary by Hebrew speakers writing on materials that
would not survive (wood, waxed wooden tablets) or if the material
survives the writing does not (potshards with water soluble ink).

e) Greek (see above).

It is also very likely that spoken Aramaic was widely used as a
non-literary by Aramaic speakers again writing on materials that would
not survive (wood, waxed wooden tablets) or if the material survives the
writing does not (potshards with water soluble ink).

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew