I am assuming the transition from paleo script to Aramaic Square script 
occurred throughout the 5th century BCE, not overnight. You are right. There 
were a number of scribal mistranscriptions, and even when the scrolls were 
written in Aramaic script, particularly respected books were written in 
paleoscript and the Shem haMeforash in square scripts texts were written in 
paleo.  That is why I created the True Type fonts for most of the paleo scripts 
as well as Herodian fonts so scholars can use them in manuscripts they typed in 
Word.
Best,
Jack Kilmon

From: Dewayne Dulaney 
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 11:47 AM
To: Jack Kilmon 
Cc: K Randolph ; b-hebrew 
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew]Psalm 22:17 from Naḥal Ḥever: several issues

Paleo script because, according to text-critical scholars such as Emanuel Tov 
and others, some textual variants likely arose due to scribes mistaking one 
letter for another. In paleo script, several Hebrew letters are very similar, 
for example resh and dalet. 

Dewayne Dulaney



On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Jack Kilmon <[email protected]> wrote:

  Why paleo-Hebrew?  The script looks like a late Herodian style.  You can go 
to my website and download a TTF called “Habakkuk Scribal” which is very 
similar to this scrap.
  http://www.historian.net/files.htm

  Jack Kilmon
  Houston, TX

  From: Dewayne Dulaney 
  Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 3:42 PM
  To: K Randolph 
  Cc: [email protected] 
  Subject: Re: [b-hebrew]Psalm 22:17 from Naḥal Ḥever: several issues

  Thanks for the pdf. I look forward to reading it. Textual criticism has 
always been an interest of mine, especially when it impacts the meaning of the 
text. 

  Has anyone who has published on this topic done a transcript of the Hebrew 
into PaleoHebrew lettering to see what the variants look like?

  Dewayne Dulaney



  On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 11:52 PM, K Randolph <[email protected]> wrote:


    Sorry I took so long to reply.

    Senior moments (I just forgot).

    The image on this page can be blown up quite a bit, and on that basis I 
disagree with the reading given in the text of the .pdf document.

    This scrap doesn’t have spaces between words, as a result one is misread. 
The final word that can be read is ידי followed by something that is not very 
clear, but can be read as ורג in the right place to have “my feet”. It looks as 
if the top stroke of the waw after the ידי has been smeared into the following 
Resh which is only partially preserved. The Gimel following the Resh is clear.

    Yes, the editor tried to make the reading more clear, but by blowing the 
picture up quite a bit, one can distinguish between the editing and the 
original.

    Oh yes, I also have the image you referenced in a later post, but this is 
the file I refer to whenever there’s a question because it’s the clearest 
picture I’ve been able to find so far.

    Yours, Karl W. Randolph.

    On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Stewart Felker <[email protected]> 
wrote:

      Here is the highest quality image of the fragment I could find:


      http://i.imgur.com/wmds5kw.jpg


      Directly preceding the word I've circled in orange is the infamous כארי 
or כארו. The DJD edition actually opts for the latter here, due to the 
elongation of the final letter (although it's been pointed out that this isn't 
ironclad). Whatever the case may be for this letter though, less attention has 
been paid to the final letter of the circled word. In MT this is simply ידי - 
but here the editors tentatively restore ידיה. 

      Regardless of however we might interpret that reading, upon closer 
inspection there are several difficulties with the final letter. There seem to 
be _two_ strokes comprising the left hand side of this letter - one curved 
somewhat inward, and one seemingly curved the opposite direction (which itself 
appears to have another slight stroke coming off the bottom of it, though this 
may just be a smudge). Further, there is a dot above and slightly to the left 
of this letter; and although it's obvious that there are several accidental ink 
artifacts in the fragment, this dot looks conspicuous to me. 


      Finally, is the larger mark a full space after this dot simply one of 
these accidental artifacts? It somewhat resembles ג to me, although the next 
word should be ורגלי (but the next clearest word that can be discerned is 
עצמ]ותי], in the line below). 




      Stewart Felker,

      University of MemphisS

    _______________________________________________
    b-hebrew mailing list
    [email protected]
    http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew






  -- 

  "In the world you will have trouble. But, be brave! I have defeated the 
world!"
  —John 16:33, DDV (Dewayne Dulaney Version)

  My Bible blogs: http://my.opera.com/Loquor/blog/ and
  http://hasopher.preachersfiles.com/

  My Biblical Languages and Latin Learning Aids Blog, and home of my 
translation of John's Gospel:
  Let Ancient Voices Speak, http://letancientvoicesspeak.preachersfiles.com.




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  b-hebrew mailing list
  [email protected]
  http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew





-- 

"In the world you will have trouble. But, be brave! I have defeated the world!"
—John 16:33, DDV (Dewayne Dulaney Version)

My Bible blogs: http://my.opera.com/Loquor/blog/ and
http://hasopher.preachersfiles.com/

My Biblical Languages and Latin Learning Aids Blog, and home of my translation 
of John's Gospel:
Let Ancient Voices Speak, http://letancientvoicesspeak.preachersfiles.com.


_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

Reply via email to