Re: Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?

From: Dean Snyder (
Date: Tue May 25 2004 - 07:46:56 CDT

  • Next message: Christopher Fynn: "Re: Classification; Phoenician"

    James Kass wrote at 5:12 PM on Monday, May 24, 2004:
    >Peter Kirk writes,
    >> Well, if you asked the ancient Phoenicians this question, of course they
    >> would have said "yes" because the script used in their time for Hebrew
    >> was very similar to their own script.

    >Of course, they'd have said "no" because modern Hebrew didn't exist
    >in their time. So, they'd not even know what modern Hebrew was. The
    >script used in their time for Hebrew wasn't "very similar to their own
    >script"; it *was* their own script.

    Modern Hebrew without the adjunct notational systems is Jewish Hebrew and
    DID exist while the Phoenicians were still around in the first few
    centuries BC. In fact Jews used both diascripts, Palaeo-Hebrew and Jewish
    Hebrew, contemporaneously.

    >"Palaeo-Hebrew" is a modern term and a modern concept.

    Obviously "Palaeo-Hebrew" is a modern term; the concept is however a very
    old one - just look at the Dead Sea scrolls, turn-of-the-era Jewish
    coins, etc., where it is employed in an archaizing way.


    Dean A. Snyder

    Assistant Research Scholar
    Manager, Digital Hammurabi Project
    Computer Science Department
    Whiting School of Engineering
    218C New Engineering Building
    3400 North Charles Street
    Johns Hopkins University
    Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218

    office: 410 516-6850
    cell: 717 817-4897

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 25 2004 - 07:46:51 CDT