The full edition is available here: http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/mcmastercollection/163/
Its a beautiful scan too! ~Chris Bartch On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 9:01 AM, C L <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Carla, > > Thank you for posting the notice about the Samaritan Pentateuch. Volume 1 > is available for download at archive.org, thanks to being out of > copyright: http://archive.org/details/derhebrischepent01gall. I was > reading it a bit this morning, and it is fantastic. So far, the copy I have > seen is very clear, and the citation of textual witnesses along the left > margin is a very welcome feature. Would that other critical editions cited > their witnesses in this fashion. > > Does anyone know where we might be able to download the remaining volumes > in this set? They do not appear to be on archive.org, but volumes 2-5 > must surely be out of copyright. > > Sincerely, > > Christopher Lovelace > > > > > There is a print edition in modern Hebrew script of the Samaritan > Pentateuch: > Der Hebräische Pentateuch der Samaritaner; > August Freiherrn von Gall, editor > Alfred Töpelmann Verlag, 1918 > > > > Best wishes, > > Carla Sulzbach > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* "[email protected]" < > [email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 20, 2013 12:00 PM > *Subject:* b-hebrew Digest, Vol 123, Issue 17 > > ----- Forwarded Message ----- > > Send b-hebrew mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of b-hebrew digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: P R (H/"Pharaoh"" Three Meanings ([email protected]) > 2. Re: Samaritan Pentateuch (George Athas) > Will: > > In analyzing PR(H [“Pharaoh”] in the received alphabetical text on the > assumption that this Biblical Egyptian name was originally written down in > Akkadian cuneiform, let’s examine how Egyptian aleph and Egyptian ayincome > out in the > Akkadian cuneiform of the Amarna Letters. You will quickly see that in > Akkadian cuneiform, Egyptian ayin cannot be distinguished from Egyptian > aleph. > > As I noted previously, Amarna Letter EA 29 features mAat being spelled as > mu-u, where the same Akkadian vowel U is used for both Egyptian aleph and > Egyptian ayin. > > But now let’s see how Akkadian cuneiform A can also represent both > Egyptian aleph and Egyptian ayin. In Amarna Letter EA 1: 2 written by > Amenhotep III himself, mAat is written, as you point out, as mu-a. To > me, that means that the Akkadian vowel A can stand for Egyptian ayin, > although you oddly opt for seeing no ayin whatsoever being written down > by Amenhotep III. Without getting bogged down as to that one example, > however, it is easy to confirm that Egyptian ayin could be represented by > the Akkadian vowel A. That is the case in the Egyptian name ap-pi-xa in > four different Amarna Letters, including EA 105: 35, and the Egyptian > name xa-ip in four different Amarna Letters, including EA 107: 16, where > the Akkadian cuneiform vowel A is used for Egyptian ayin. > > But the Akkadian cuneiform vowel A can also be used for Egyptian aleph! For > example, in both the Amarna Letters and the Patriarchal narratives, the > most frequent beginning of an Egyptian name is pA. The Egyptian name pa- > xa-na-te in four different Amarna Letters, including EA 60: 10, spells > the Egyptian aleph with an A. The Egyptian name pi-wu-ri features four > different spellings of pA, but in three separate Amarna Letters, > including EA 287: 45 from IR-Heba of Jerusalem [whose scribe may have > been the scribe who, shortly after leaving Jerusalem, was commissioned by > the tent-dwelling Hebrews to write down the Patriarchal narratives in > Akkadian cuneiform], the second letter in pA is spelled with the > Akkadianvowel A. > > So when PR(H in Genesis is setting forth an Egyptian name, the Hebrew > alphabetical ayin/( that one sees in the received text could just as > easily have been originally intended to be a Hebrew alphabetical aleph/). > Why? Because that name was first written down in the Late Bronze Age, > when the only way to write down a sophisticated composition like the > Patriarchal narratives was by means of Akkadian cuneiform. The AmarnaLetters > attest that sometimes the > Akkadian vowel U was used to render both Egyptian aleph and Egyptian ayin, > and sometimes the Akkadian vowel A was used to render both Egyptian alephand > Egyptian > ayin. In fact, on a more general level, Akkadian cuneiform generally was > unable to differentiate among the various gutturals. That applies in > spades to ayin vs. aleph. > > As to PR(H in particular, we note that Akkadian cuneiform heth could > render, among other letters, alphabetical Hebrew ayin/( or alphabetical > Hebrew heth/X, and that the Akkadian vowel A was sometimes used to render > both Egyptian aleph and Egyptian ayin. PR(H in the received text started > out in Akkadian cuneiform as something like PR – RI – A – XI. Those four > Akkadian cuneiform signs could mean [among other possibilities] either > (i) PR(H [per the received text], or (ii) P R )X, with the latter being pA > ra Ax : pA ra a-khe : “Devoted to The Ra”, which compares nicely with Akhe > -n-Aten : “Devoted to Aten”. > > If we reverse engineer the received alphabetical text as to the Biblical > Egyptian name PR(H and determine what the original Akkadian cuneiform > signs were, we then see an e-x-a-c-t letter-for-letter match of the > original cuneiform version of PR(H to P R )X : pA ra Ax : pA ra a-khe : > “Devoted to The Ra”. Will, it’s an e-x-a-c-t match of a-l-l the > letters. It’s not merely close, it’s e-x-a-c-t . > > Surely you would agree that if the Patriarchal narratives were not > originally written down in the Bronze Age using Akkadian cuneiform, they > can’t be old and accurate as to an historical Patriarchal Age. To see > then if the Patriarchal narratives are or are not truly ancient and > accurate, simply reverse engineer the Egyptian names in the received text > to determine how they would have originally been recorded in > Akkadiancuneiform. > Then the gorgeous result is e-x-a-c-t letter-for-letter matches to Late > Amarna nomenclature that in each case fit the storyline perfectly. The > greatest wordsmith of all time created these Biblical Egyptian names. But > we cannot appreciate them unless we reverse engineer the alphabetical > Hebrew letters in the received text to determine the Akkadian cuneiform > originals, and then ask what Egyptian names could result from such > Akkadian cuneiform originals. For example, the name of Joseph’s Egyptian > priestly father-in-law, once it is recognized that the final intended > letter was heth, not ayin, is: pA wAt -Y- pA rx, referencing such > priest’s devotion to Akhenaten as allegedly being “the only one/pA who > knows/rx the distant/pA wAt [God]”. Only Akhenaten ever made such a > daunting theological claim. And Akhenaten himself is fittingly referred > to as P R )X : pA ra Ax : pA ra a-khe : “Devoted to The Ra”, which > exemplifies Late Amarna theology perfectly. > > The true antiquity and historical accuracy of the Patriarchal narratives > come shining through when we reverse engineer the alphabetical Hebrew > letters in these Biblical Egyptian names to determine the Akkadiancuneiform > original signs, and then ask what Egyptian names could result > from those original Akkadian cuneiform signs. We find that, unlike all > previous attempts to explain these Biblical Egyptian names, we don’t have > to stretch a single letter! Rather, we merely need to recognize that > Akkadian cuneiform writing, such as in the original written version of > the Patriarchal narratives, usually did not distinguish one guttural from > another. > > Jim Stinehart > Evanston , Illinois > This further response comes courtesy of Carla Sulzbach in Montreal: > > There is a print edition in modern Hebrew script of the Samaritan > Pentateuch: > Der Hebräische Pentateuch der Samaritaner; > August Freiherrn von Gall, editor > Alfred Töpelmann Verlag, 1918 > > > > Best wishes, > > Carla Sulzbach > > > *GEORGE ATHAS* > *Dean of Research,* > *Moore Theological College *(moore.edu.au) > *Sydney, Australia* > > > _______________________________________________ > b-hebrew mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew > > > _______________________________________________ > b-hebrew mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew > >
_______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
