Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Chavoux Luyt <chavoux AT gmail.com>]

Shalom Jim

On 6 April 2013 16:05, <jimstinehart AT aol.com> wrote:

<snip> 

1.  Prior to the 1^st millennium BCE [that is to say, during any time period that might be attributed to Moses], there was no Hebrew alphabet that was developed enough to write down a sophisticated composition like the Patriarchal narratives.  The Ugaritic alphabet was sophisticated enough, but Ugarit is located way up north in western Syria, and there is absolutely no evidence that the early Hebrews, who lived in south-central Canaan, ever used the Ugaritic alphabet.

While I am totally comfortable that the patriarchal narrative might have first been written down in Akkadian cuniform (even likely, since Abraham came from Mesopotamia), I do not see why the alphabet used in the Wadi el-Hol or Serabit inscriptions (from 19th century BC and ~1850 BC) would not have been developed enough by the time of Moses (14th/12th century BC) for the Torah (including the patriarchal narratives) to be written down in an early alphabetical script. We have evidence of "Asiatics" (which would include the Hebrews) in Egypt using these early alphabets, even in Sinai where the Torah was first given.

The common usage among ANE scribes of updating both language and place names would give a good enough explanation for any 7th century BC influence, without the need for a convoluted theory of long transmission in cuneiform (when the much simpler alphabet were already known for centuries).

Regards

Chavoux Luyt