Q&A: Phoenician Alphabet
Phoenician Alphabet
Question
Hello Honorable Rabbi,
I read that the Phoenician alphabet, which has 22 letters and is the source of the Aramaic script we use today, developed around 1000 BCE. If so, how could it be that Moses wrote the Torah in this script? And if not in this script but rather in an earlier one such as Egyptian hieroglyphics, how can one know the exact translation? After all, that script did not have letters but simply symbols, so the translation into the Hebrew script we know today is not necessarily precise.
Thank you very much.
Have a good week.
Answer
A', hello.
I am not familiar with the issue. Here you can read a more moderate thesis: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%A4%D7%91%D7%99%D7%AA_%D7%A2%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%99
Obviously, if our script is a later development, then Moses did not write the Torah in this script. The discussion of which script the Torah was given in is not simple, and it has already been discussed.
I did not understand your question about symbols. Are you assuming that the Torah was written in symbols and then raising difficulties on that basis? As for changes in letters, that is less problematic, because the same language can be written in different letters. Admittedly, interpretations derived from the crowns on the letters become more problematic if these are not the original letters. Therefore, the accepted claim in our tradition is that the Torah was originally written in the Hebrew-Assyrian script. But I have not checked, and I am not familiar with the topic.
Discussion on Answer
I understand. What I did not understand is how you are assuming, as a hypothesis, that the Torah was written in hieroglyphics and then raising objections. At most, one could ask about a Torah that was given in a different consonantal script, and then the question is more moderate.
You're right.
As for a different script, the question is who translated the Torah into the script we use today. If this was done through prophecy (Ezra?), then there is still room for precision and exactness regarding the crowns on the letters. On second thought, this explanation would also suffice even if the hieroglyphics hypothesis were correct.
Forgive me, Rabbi, but there is an explicit Talmudic text that the Torah was given in "Hebrew" script and not in our later Assyrian script (Sanhedrin 21b, in the words of Mar Zutra).
What is ancient Hebrew script?
* One option is that this refers to the script that scholarship calls "Paleo-Hebrew"—the script that was common in the kingdoms of Israel and Judah.
* Another option is that it refers to Proto-Canaanite script. This is a consonantal script that was common in Canaan; it has 22 letters (some parallel our consonants) and is dated to the 15th century BCE, so it fits the purpose exactly.
In my opinion this is a reasonable theory, and it also fits with our Sages, and there is no need to go to the thesis of pictographic writing.
As for the difficulty regarding all the crowns on the letters—already the Ritva asked this, and see the commentators on the site.
Just as an aside regarding Egyptian hieroglyphic script—from the 12th Dynasty onward these were already drawings with consonantal significance and not merely pictures. So even if it had been hieroglyphic script, there would be no difficulty in that.
The Talmud does indeed say that; the question is whether that fits with the findings of scholarship. I am not knowledgeable in this area, and it is certainly possible that you are right.
Not only is Hebrew script earlier than the tenth century, but its roots are in Sinai, in the mine next to Mount Serabit el-Khadim, which some identify with Mount Sinai (see Wikipedia). The Canaanite miners developed this script.
Here is a fascinating article on the matter:
:http://www.haaretz.co.il/literature/safrut/print/1.1684926
And a fluent, clear explanation accompanied by undisguised theatricality from the somewhat questionable program "And the Earth Was Tohu Va-Vohu":
Starting from minute 39.
Articles from this year—controversial ones—claim that the invention of writing is connected to the people of the slaves—Israel—as early as 3,800 years ago:
http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4889468,00.html
http://rotter.net/forum/scoops1/362168.shtml
And this is what Ben-Zion Luria already argued years ago on the basis of archaeological, epigraphic, and logical evidence in "Whose Hebrew Script," Beit Mikra 84, p. 101: In vague language and with verbal hints, Tur-Sinai concludes the entry "Alphabet" in the Biblical Encyclopedia. He surmises that the Canaanite-Hebrew alphabet is apparently connected to the history of Israel and its Torah. Against all the material from external sources and the opinions of contemporary scholars, we will cite the words of Eupolemus, who says:
"It was Moses who transmitted writing to the Jews, and from them the Tyrians received it, and they passed it on to the Greeks." Moses grew up in Pharaoh's house and knew the Egyptian script of hundreds of signs, but the leap from that to turning it into an alphabetic script of 22 letters is very great. This is a new idea, independent of the "sources," a brilliant idea, and there is no need to look for it in some unknown "Canaanite people." In general, a brilliant idea is the expression of an individual, not of some anonymous collective, as scholars try to claim. Why do they ignore the words of Eupolemus? They created a vague theory when things are simple and clear. Their only deficiency is that this is an expression of Jewish genius.
When Moses conceived the idea of how to bequeath his Torah of life to his people, this brilliant idea flashed in his mind, and he passed it on to his people and to all humanity.
About 4,000 years ago, scribes living in the land of Canaan invented the Canaanite script. The names of the letters that they gave then have continued from that time until today. At first the script was pictographic; the form of the letter was a drawing—for example, the letter aleph was drawn as the head of an ox, which was then called in Canaanite "aluf." Since matres lectionis were not yet in use, the name of the letter was aleph without the vav in the middle. The names of the letters were taken from animals, plants, and inanimate objects, with the exception of the letter heh.
What I meant was that if we are talking about symbols that do not represent consonants and sounds but rather represent a whole word, then translating that into Hebrew script is very difficult and certainly not precise, which detracts from the holiness of the Torah text as we know it today.