Re: Phoenician, Fraktur etc

From: James Kass (
Date: Wed May 26 2004 - 07:28:05 CDT

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Proposal to encode dominoes and other game symbols"

    Peter Kirk wrote,

    > If I remember correctly, some modern Israeli coins have palaeo-Hebrew as
    > well as Hebrew inscriptions. Just found the link: on 28th April Simon
    > Montagu pointed us to and
    > But I also remember someone
    > saying that coin inscriptions are outside the scope of Unicode, I'm not
    > sure why.

    Thank you.

    Knew I'd seen this fairly recently someplace! For some reason, I
    thought it was on one of the pages of ancient coins visited when
    trying to find more examples of Phoenician numerals. John Hudson
    has also already sent a link for a modern coin example.

    > I'm sure I can find references which call Phoenician and Hebrew one
    > script, and then we are back to disputable claims of who is in the majority.

    Not to mention, as you do elsewhere, how one defines 'script'. But,
    if you can find such a reference, I'd still like to read it.

    > If Fraktur and ordinary Latin are the same script, then it couldn't be
    > said that the Germans abandoned the Fraktur script after WWII. Yet, that
    > is what available references say did happen. Well, I haven't checked,
    > but I remember reading this kind of thing.

    Me too. Fairly recently, possibly on a proof-reader's list. It's also
    in Daniels and Bright, IIRC. But, it was abandoned before the war ended,
    maybe even sometime in the 1930s.

    > Well, maybe the rules changed with time. And there does seem to have
    > been a reluctance to write the name of God in the new-fangled Aramaic
    > square glyphs. But I'm sure that basically the copyists considered that
    > they were copying exactly the same string of characters, just using
    > different glyphs for them. They certainly would not have considered this
    > a change to the text, just a change in how it was represented on their
    > equivalent of paper.
    ...has some good detail on the rules, but not their origin. And,
    it doesn't really mention palaeo-.

    (Deuteronomy 4:2),
    "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither
    shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the
    commandments of the LORD your God which I command you."

    There was something about not even omitting a "jot or a tittle"
    when copying, IIRC.

    (On Fraktur, following some logic...)
    > Doug, I hope this is now clear to you.

    So, we're all agreed that Fraktur should be unified with Hebrew, right?
    (If that's funny, it doesn't need a smiley, and if it isn't, a smiley
    wouldn't help.)

    Best regards,

    James Kass

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 26 2004 - 07:29:50 CDT