Dean Snyder wrote, > 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.
Of course, you're right about the age of modern Hebrew overlapping the age of Phoenician a bit. The wording in my post, to say the least, was infelicitous. I should probably have just asked: Did the ancient Phoenicians write Phoenician in modern Hebrew? > 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. My pocket change is depressingly modern. Some coins from the Phoenician region apparently have Phoenician numerals and Hebrew legends suggesting that these coins weren't issued by the Phoenicians. I couldn't find any references to coins bearing both Hebrew and palaeo-Hebrew legends, but wouldn't be surprised if they exist. (Numismatist's plain text database of coin legends, anyone?) The Greeks issued coins with Greek legends and Phoenician numerals during the reign of Alexander the Great, but moved to using Greek for the dates, too. http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Old_World_Archaeology_and_Art/html/epublications/papers/alexander_coinage/alexander.html If palaeo-Hebrew and square Hebrew are the same script, then it couldn't be said that the Jews abandoned the palaeo-Hebrew script after the exile. Yet, this is what available references say did happen. (By available, I mean to me. Additional citations would be welcome.) Negative proofs are kind of hard. I've been unable to find anything which states that the ancient Jews considered Phoenician and Hebrew to be the same script. If it were easily found, I'd've found it already. In fairness, I've also tried to find anything documenting that the ancient Jews specifically considered Phoenician and Hebrew to be separate scripts. Maybe it was such a "no-brainer" (either way) for them that they never recorded their thoughts on the subject. Or, maybe nothing survived. Or, maybe nothing's been brought to light yet. Or, maybe somebody knows better? Religious scribes had very strict rules. The Word was supposed to be copied *very* faithfully. Yet, older DSS appear seem to have been in palaeo- and newer DSS in Hebrew. Did the scribes think they were faithfully copying older scrolls when they "abandoned palaeo-Hebrew script" and made newer scrolls in Hebrew? Did they make the newer scrolls because they'd abandoned the older script and no-one other than scholars could *read* the older scrolls? Did the very strict rules begin some time after the older script was abandoned? Does anyone know? Best regards, James Kass
