Announcement

Collapse

Archeology 201 Guidelines

If Indiana Jones happened to be a member of Tweb, this is where he'd hang out.

Welcome to the Archeology forum. Were you out doing some gardening and dug up a relic from the distant past? would you like to know more about Ancient Egypt? Did you think Memphis was actually a city in Tennessee?

Well, for the answers to those and other burning questions you've found the right digs.

Our forum rules apply here too, if you haven't read them now is the time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Sodom and Gomorrah Discovered

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
    Why would I consider Paleo Hebrew to be post exile when it clearly existed 500 years before the exile? 8th Century BC (200+ years before the exile), the Hezekiah Tunnel was constructed. A plaque attesting that construction is written in Paleo-Hebrew. Pottery shards dating to 1000 BC are inscribed with Paleo-Hebrew. Your claim - that Hebrew language was not put to writing before the exile - is confuted. Paleo Hebrew continued in some small parts of liturgical use until the sacking of the second temple. Why would the obsolete written form continue in use for liturgical purposes? Or rather, to word the question in accord with your claims -
    . . . because there is absolutely no evidence of any of the OT before and during the exile.

    why would the obsolete form be introduced for liturgical purposes?
    . . . because their only known sources and forms were Ugarit.


    The claim is made that sections of the Old Testament (and possibly the entire Pentateuch) were written in Paleo-Hebrew, then transcribed to Biblical Hebrew during the exile. Which is to say, the Old Testament substantially existed prior to the exile, and after commencement of the exile redacted and edited. The claim is supported by the continuing practice of using Paleo-Hebrew for parts of the scripture after the exile. I have not been able to find any authoritative source contesting the claim. The evidence that the scriptures were in fact put to writing before the exile though scant, in the absence of any contrary claim, makes it reasonable to assume that at least some of the scriptures did in fact exist in written form before the exile.
    Again, and Again and Again there is absolutely no evidence that any of the Old Testament was written down in any form of Hebrew before the exile nor during the exile. have been waiting for years on Tweb for someone to provide evidence, None have so far. Still waiting . . .

    The only evidence of parts of the Pentateuch and Psalms, and the themes are found in Ugarit, Canaanite and Babylonian texts. Also many of the Psalms portrays a Ugarit polytheistic theology. You inadequately responded to showmeproof concerning your reference to the council of Gods as human judges. The translation is specific 'gods' sometimes translated in different Bibles as 'Divine Beings,' but this is a hedge, because the actual word used refers to 'gods,' and fits the context of other references in Psalms. As showmeproof indicated in the other thread you need to do a little homework on the 'council of Gods' referred to in Psalms. Hint it does not refer to human judges.

    There never was a trade tongue that didn't. Relevance?
    Trade is considered the primary motivation for development of the written language going back to its earliest beginnings. In fact tokens designating different animals and products and counting are among the earliest written ever used. The other earliest writing is lunar calendars. The tongues and written language used in trade are those of the major dominant trading civilizations are the dominant languages. Minor cultures like the Hebrews adopted the languages of the dominant cultures, and over time evolved their own written language.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-27-2014, 07:30 AM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • Minor cultures like the Hebrews adopted the languages of the dominant cultures, and over time evolved their own written language.
      Minor cultures generally don't have a dynasty that is recognised by other cultures. Minor cultures don't exact tribute. Cultures that are capable of exacting tribute generally are capable of putting their languages into writing - at least when the tribute paying cultures have advanced enough to develop a writing system.

      The Old Testament continued to have the name of God written in paleo Hebrew until long after the Babylonian exile, along with a few other pieces of scripture - notably the "Song of Moses". That practice attests to the high probability a prior written form.

      Archaic Biblical Hebrew from the 10th to the 6th century BCE, corresponding to the Monarchic Period until the Babylonian Exile and represented by certain texts in the Hebrew Bible (Tanach), notably the Song of Moses (Exodus 15) and the Song of Deborah (Judges 5). Also called Old Hebrew or Paleo-Hebrew. It was written in a form of the Canaanite script. (A script descended from this is still used by the Samaritans, see Samaritan Hebrew language.)
      Standard Biblical Hebrew around the 8th to 6th centuries BCE, corresponding to the late Monarchic period and the Babylonian Exile. It is represented by the bulk of the Hebrew Bible that attains much of its present form around this time. Also called Biblical Hebrew, Early Biblical Hebrew, Classical Biblical Hebrew (or Classical Hebrew in the narrowest sense).
      THE JEWS AND MODERN CAPITALISM
      The Bible, i.e. the Old Testament, is the foundation upon which the entire structure of Judaism was built up. It was written by many hands at different periods, thus forming, as it were, a piece of literary mosaic. The most important portion of the whole is th Torha, i.e. the Pentateuch. It received its present shape by the commingling of two complete works sometime in the period after Ezra. The one was the old and the new (the Deuteronomic) Law Book (650 BC)
      Every authoritative source I can find says much the same. The Pentateuch was based on prior written material, edited and collated around 650 BC - a shade more than 50 years prior to the first phase of the Babylonian exile.
      Last edited by tabibito; 07-27-2014, 08:54 AM.
      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
      .
      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
      Scripture before Tradition:
      but that won't prevent others from
      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
      of the right to call yourself Christian.

      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

      Comment


      • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
        Minor cultures generally don't have a dynasty that is recognised by other cultures. Minor cultures don't exact tribute. Cultures that are capable of exacting tribute generally are capable of putting their languages into writing - at least when the tribute paying cultures have advanced enough to develop a writing system.
        Yes, this would be 'likely' true. We do not have archeological evidence of Hebrew victories or tribute. The only references we have are from those that defeated the Hebrews with the capability to write the steles. Other then the questionable claims of the OT texts, what devidence do have to support these victories by Hebrews pre exile that Hebrews collected tribute.

        The Old Testament continued to have the name of God written in paleo Hebrew until long after the Babylonian exile, along with a few other pieces of scripture - notably the "Song of Moses". That practice attests to the high probability a prior written form.

        Every authoritative source I can find says much the same. The Pentateuch was based on prior written material, edited and collated around 650 BC - a shade more than 50 years prior to the first phase of the Babylonian exile.
        Need some references. The figure 'at least 50 years' at present would be simply based on the hope that something existed other then Ugarit and Canaanite texts, and their names for gods.

        The only known prior written material remains Ugarit, Canaanite and Babylonian texts that may have been used t compile these books. It is possible that some written material existed before 600 BCE, but at present this no more then a claim. Ugarit or some sort of paleo-Hebrew may have existed in some form, but until such evidence is provided it remains speculation what actually existed.
        Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-27-2014, 11:11 AM.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • Which parts of the Song of Moses, and more particularly, the Song of Deborah, feature in the Ugarit texts?
          1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
          .
          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
          Scripture before Tradition:
          but that won't prevent others from
          taking it upon themselves to deprive you
          of the right to call yourself Christian.

          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

          Comment


          • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
            Which parts of the Song of Moses, and more particularly, the Song of Deborah, feature in the Ugarit texts?
            I did not say they did. I said many parts of the OT texts are featured in the Ugarit texts, and these represent the only known pre-exile texts. It remains the fact that absolutely no other such text exists pre-exile. It remains the possibility that oral traditions could be the source of the Song of Moses, and the Song of Deborah, and Ugarit and Paleo (Ugarit/Hebrew) was used for a while after the exile and lead to text in Aramaic.
            Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-27-2014, 11:19 AM.
            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

            go with the flow the river knows . . .

            Frank

            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
              I did not say they did. I said many parts of the OT texts are featured in the Ugarit texts, and these represent the only known pre-exile texts.
              It remains the fact that absolutely no other such text exists pre-exile.
              Nor is it reasonable to expect that they will be (if by "none exists" you mean that there are no known extant examples. Maybe in the palace attributed to David, but (as far as I know) the most likely place for a repository, Solomon's Temple, will never be excavated.
              It remains the possibility that oral traditions could be the source of the Song of Moses, and the Song of Deborah, and Ugarit and Paleo (Ugarit/Hebrew) was used for a while after the exile and lead to text in Aramaic.
              Attestation (though seemingly, not evidence) that written sources existed and were compiled prior to the Babylonian exile exists. That being the case, your speculation (which you declared inappropriate when you thought I was engaging in it) is in conflict with the reasoned opinion of scholars in the field.
              Khirbat Qeiyafa
              "The excavations at Khirbat Qeiyafa clearly reveal an urban society that existed in Judah already in the late eleventh century BCE. It can no longer be argued that the Kingdom of Judah developed only in the late eighth century BCE or at some other later date."
              The site, according to Garfinkel, has "a town plan
              characteristic of the Kingdom of Judah
              that is also known from other sites, e.g., Beit Shemesh, Tell en-Nasbeh, Tell Beit Mirsim and Beersheba. A casemate wall was built at all of these sites and the city’s houses next to it incorporated the casemates as one of the dwelling’s rooms. This model is not known from any Canaanite, Philistine or Kingdom of Israel site."[26]

              The site is massively fortified, "including the use of stones that weigh up to eight tons apiece."[26]

              "500 jar handles bearing a single finger print, or sometimes two or three, were found. Marking jar handles is characteristic of the Kingdom of Judah and it seems this practice has already begun in the early Iron Age IIA."

              With regard to an Ostracon found on the site: (the least supportive of 3 translations with regard to a Biblical connection.)
              On January 10, 2010, the University of Haifa issued a press release stating that the text was a social statement relating to slaves, widows and orphans. According to this interpretation, the text "uses verbs that were characteristic of Hebrew, such as asah ("did") and `avad ("worked"), which were rarely used in other regional languages. Particular words that appear in the text, such as almanah ("widow") are specific to Hebrew and are written differently in other local languages.
              The claim that this is Hebrew is disputed. No ifs buts and maybes have been raised with regard to the dating (11th Century BC) or identification of the site as Hebrew.

              Hebrew presence and establishment as a sedentary population capable of heavy duty architecture before the 10th Century is satisfactorily demonstrated.

              Yes, this would be 'likely' true. We do not have archeological evidence of Hebrew victories or tribute. The only references we have are from those that defeated the Hebrews with the capability to write the steles. Other then the questionable claims of the OT texts, what devidence do have to support these victories by Hebrews pre exile that Hebrews collected tribute.
              The Mesha Stele is a record by a vassal king who threw over the traces and won a series victories against his former oppressor, a king of Israel. The Tel Dan Stele tells a similar story, identifying the king of Israel and the king of the house of David (King of Judah) separately.
              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
              .
              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
              Scripture before Tradition:
              but that won't prevent others from
              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
              of the right to call yourself Christian.

              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

              Comment


              • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                Nor is it reasonable to expect that they will be (if by "none exists" you mean that there are no known extant examples. Maybe in the palace attributed to David, but (as far as I know) the most likely place for a repository, Solomon's Temple, will never be excavated.
                Attestation (though seemingly, not evidence) that written sources existed and were compiled prior to the Babylonian exile exists. That being the case, your speculation (which you declared inappropriate when you thought I was engaging in it) is in conflict with the reasoned opinion of scholars in the field.
                Khirbat Qeiyafa The claim that this is Hebrew is disputed. No ifs buts and maybes have been raised with regard to the dating (11th Century BC) or identification of the site as Hebrew.

                Hebrew presence and establishment as a sedentary population capable of heavy duty architecture before the 10th Century is satisfactorily demonstrated.



                The Mesha Stele is a record by a vassal king who threw over the traces and won a series victories against his former oppressor, a king of Israel. The Tel Dan Stele tells a similar story, identifying the king of Israel and the king of the house of David (King of Judah) separately.
                I disagree with nothing here, and it does not change anything. Most pastoral cultures did to a certain extent become sedentary during the Iron Age as in Xinjiang in Western China. As far as their agriculture they remained pastoral in the habit and diet, even though they were on the major Silk Road trade route traveled by diverse peoples from many regions of the East and West. . The fact remains, no text of the Bible exist. As far as the language of this time, yes, a few unique words appear, and of course more did over time, but this represents a natural evolution of a language. At this time it remains simply a variant of Ugarit.
                Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-27-2014, 03:31 PM.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • At this time it remains simply a variant of Ugarit.
                  A notable variant. Ugaritic was written left to right. Paleo-Hebrew could be written left to right, right to left, or top to bottom.
                  I'll leave it to you to work out what that writing order indicates, particularly given that the development of Ugaritic is dated to (at the latest) 1400 BC
                  1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                  .
                  ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                  Scripture before Tradition:
                  but that won't prevent others from
                  taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                  of the right to call yourself Christian.

                  ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                    Nor is it reasonable to expect that they will be (if by "none exists" you mean that there are no known extant examples. Maybe in the palace attributed to David, but (as far as I know) the most likely place for a repository, Solomon's Temple, will never be excavated.
                    Attestation (though seemingly, not evidence) that written sources existed and were compiled prior to the Babylonian exile exists. That being the case, your speculation (which you declared inappropriate when you thought I was engaging in it) is in conflict with the reasoned opinion of scholars in the field.
                    Khirbat Qeiyafa The claim that this is Hebrew is disputed. No ifs buts and maybes have been raised with regard to the dating (11th Century BC) or identification of the site as Hebrew.

                    Hebrew presence and establishment as a sedentary population capable of heavy duty architecture before the 10th Century is satisfactorily demonstrated.



                    The Mesha Stele is a record by a vassal king who threw over the traces and won a series victories against his former oppressor, a king of Israel. The Tel Dan Stele tells a similar story, identifying the king of Israel and the king of the house of David (King of Judah) separately.
                    Here is some other stuff on Khirbat Qeiyafa
                    -The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
                    Sir James Jeans

                    -This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
                    Sir Isaac Newton

                    Comment


                    • Once again,Thankee, Quantum Weirdness - A picture is indeed worth a thousand words - and there are many pictures.
                      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                      .
                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                      Scripture before Tradition:
                      but that won't prevent others from
                      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                      of the right to call yourself Christian.

                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                        A notable variant. Ugaritic was written left to right. Paleo-Hebrew could be written left to right, right to left, or top to bottom.
                        I'll leave it to you to work out what that writing order indicates, particularly given that the development of Ugaritic is dated to (at the latest) 1400 BC
                        It remains a variant, some early writing on pottery from Jerusalum in Ugarit/Phoenician alphabet is open to question as to whether it was written right to left or left to right. I will check the reference and post it. The conclusion of the different fragments found in this period is the writing had not been standardized in one specific alphabet or writing. It remains that the dominant writing found in the region is either Ugarit/Canaanite or proto Ugarit/Canaanite.

                        As far as the later Ugarit/Canaanite writing, it directly evolved from more ancient cuneiform writing where the earliest text, and text of related stories of the OT is found at a time when no Hebrew writing is known to exist.

                        This reference gives good comparisons of the origins and evolution of writing in the region. The only thing I would add here I would describe this as the evolution of Phoenician/Ugarit/Canaanite writing. This dominance of this alphabet and writing is directly related to the dominance in trade in the region of these cultures.

                        Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugaritic_alphabet



                        At the time the Ugaritic script was in use (ca. 1300–1190 BCE),[7] Ugarit was at the centre of the literate world, among Egypt, Anatolia, Cyprus, Crete, and Mesopotamia. Ugaritic combined the system of the Semitic abjad with cuneiform writing methods (pressing a stylus into clay). However, scholars have searched in vain for graphic prototypes of the Ugaritic letters in Mesopotamian cuneiform. Recently, some have suggested that Ugaritic represents some form of the Proto-Sinaitic alphabet,[8] the letter forms distorted as an adaptation to writing on clay with a stylus. (There may also have been a degree of influence from the poorly understood Byblos syllabary.[9]) It has been proposed in this regard that the two basic shapes in cuneiform, a linear wedge, as in ��, and a corner wedge, as in ��, may correspond to lines and circles in the linear Semitic alphabets: the three Semitic letters with circles, preserved in the Greek Θ, O and Latin Q, are all made with corner wedges in Ugaritic: �� Tet, �� Ain, and �� Qopa. Other letters look similar as well: �� Ho resembles its assumed Greek cognate E, while �� Wo, �� Pu, and �� Thanna are similar to Greek Y, Π, and Σ turned on their sides.[8] Jared Diamond[10] believes the alphabet was consciously designed, citing as evidence the possibility that the letters with the fewest strokes may have been the most frequent.

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        Versions of the cuneiform script go back to 3100 BCE in the Sumer region. The older Akkadian cuneiform literature also contains references and stories related to the Hebrews and the Pentateuch.
                        Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-28-2014, 01:56 PM.
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment

                        Related Threads

                        Collapse

                        Topics Statistics Last Post
                        Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 05:38 AM
                        0 responses
                        9 views
                        0 likes
                        Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                        Started by tabibito, 09-07-2023, 02:41 PM
                        30 responses
                        132 views
                        0 likes
                        Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                        Working...
                        X