Ross G Caldwell
Re: Re: Re: Elephants are in Africa and India
Well, spell it out. Let me see if I buy it.
Huck said:
Well, spell it out. Let me see if I buy it.
Reflections on the Development of Hebrew Letters
Huck
Oh, no ... it's a training program for intuitive thinking ..
Well, the Sepher Yetzirah author gives the hint, that 12 letters are related to the human body.
It's not, that the Sepher Yetzirah should be seen as authority in this matter, it's late and somehow "forges", but some of its content are old and with that "real" for our problem around 17th/18th BC.
12 for the body. 12 for the ABC-man.
How much we've seen? How much had the head?
kwaw
As but an amateur here, I ask myself what is the connection between the Greek and Assyrian [square hebrew] script? According to scholars, the hebrews adopted the Assyrian [Square] scripyt circa 6th-2nd cent., b.c.e.
According to Rabbinacal tradition, Ezra [re] introduced the Assyrian script circa 4th cent. b.c.e. After the Alexandrian conquests and thus during the period of hellenistic rule.
As much as huck thinks otherwise, the Assyrian and Paleo-hebraic are different scripts. Huck made his case upon the paleo-hebraic script, but from the 4th century on none but the samaritan sect used this script. Nonetheless, both scripts [according to various scholars] ultimately derive from the phoenician.
As for the names of the hebrew alphabet, it seems to me, as an amateur in this subject, they are quite late. Much is made of the similarity of the hebrew and greek alphabet. Some say this is because they share an origin in the Phoenican script. But the earliest example of the names of the Hebrew alphabet is some 430 years after the Greeks took control of Palestine. I tend to belief, in that period of time, the hellenistic influence upon the alphabet is likely to have been far stronger than that of the phoenicians some 1500 years before. By the time of 'christ' hebew had already entered into the stage of becomeing a 'dead' language. Used in liturgy, as of latin in Catholic Church, but not common language. Common language was Aramaic. The language of merchants, diplomats and the educated in general was Greek. Greek was the 'international' language of the time similar to the English of today. The hebrew alphabet is possibly as much to do with the Hellenistic influence of the time as it is to a 'speculative' phoenician origin several thousand years before?
I do not state this in any authoritive manner, but as a layperson this seems a possiblity. The scholars among the group will now, no doubt and hopefully, correct my lay opinion.
Kwaw
According to Rabbinacal tradition, Ezra [re] introduced the Assyrian script circa 4th cent. b.c.e. After the Alexandrian conquests and thus during the period of hellenistic rule.
As much as huck thinks otherwise, the Assyrian and Paleo-hebraic are different scripts. Huck made his case upon the paleo-hebraic script, but from the 4th century on none but the samaritan sect used this script. Nonetheless, both scripts [according to various scholars] ultimately derive from the phoenician.
As for the names of the hebrew alphabet, it seems to me, as an amateur in this subject, they are quite late. Much is made of the similarity of the hebrew and greek alphabet. Some say this is because they share an origin in the Phoenican script. But the earliest example of the names of the Hebrew alphabet is some 430 years after the Greeks took control of Palestine. I tend to belief, in that period of time, the hellenistic influence upon the alphabet is likely to have been far stronger than that of the phoenicians some 1500 years before. By the time of 'christ' hebew had already entered into the stage of becomeing a 'dead' language. Used in liturgy, as of latin in Catholic Church, but not common language. Common language was Aramaic. The language of merchants, diplomats and the educated in general was Greek. Greek was the 'international' language of the time similar to the English of today. The hebrew alphabet is possibly as much to do with the Hellenistic influence of the time as it is to a 'speculative' phoenician origin several thousand years before?
I do not state this in any authoritive manner, but as a layperson this seems a possiblity. The scholars among the group will now, no doubt and hopefully, correct my lay opinion.
Kwaw
kwaw
Ross G Caldwell said:
Hi Ross
Your right it appears twice in the bible not as ALPh but as ALVPh. The 'V' [vau] as a 'weak' consonant or when used as a vowel can be dropped. The most common meaning of ALVPh is 'chief', deriving from pre-hebraic [phoenician 'god', 'leader' 'lord' 'chief' or 'god']. In aramiac it means 'to behold'. The lexicon included in the online bible gives:
AV- duke 57, guide 4, friends 2, governors 2, captains 1, governor 1, ox 2; 69
1) tame, docile
2) friend, intimate
3) chief
According to my kabbalistic teaching which of course is nothing but worthless fiction according to Huck it derives from phoenican 'Al' meaning it is said 'strength' and 'G-d'. It means not 'ox' but 'oxen' in a 'yoke'. The connection with 'to teach, to learn' is said by what Huck apparently regards as worthless exegesis to be derived from the fact that a young untrained ox would be yoked to an older ox, thus 'to teach and to learn'. The idea of 'yoke' includes the idea of 'to be with' and 'covenant'. By 'covenant' G-d is seen as in 'covenant' [yoked, beholden] to his people. "Strong authority" is seen as the older ox or strong leader. It may relate from anything to chief, captain, guard. It also means 'pillar' as a 'strong support'. By 'yoke' is meant union of two parties, whether of a young ox and older in training or of the union or covenant between man and god. Tame and docile relate to its domesticity.
How much of this is paleo-historically true I don't know. It is what I have learnt from kabbalastic tradition, which Huck regards apparently as 'fictional'. No doubt much of it is down to mystical exegesis of the letters, IMHO that does not make it 'fictional' and apparently worthless. Historically correct or not, for me it has spiritually truth.
Kwaw
Huck
... Kwaw,history is always fiction, if it was done by a kabbalist in 16th/17th century or by me in the 20th/21th.
Although there is a difference. We've the better sources nowadays ....
Usually.Well, they had perhaps more intensity in it ... with the trouble of missing electrical light, they couldn't read as much we do, time was a little boring. Also they couldn't use internet and discuss finest details of all possible historical developments with other crazy heads in a computer in Australia ... and no chance to study via mouseclick some Hebrew or Phoenician letters written in stone some 2000 or 3000 years ago.
It's really good to a guy like me - interested in so much things - to live nowadays. Never before the situation was better - if I concentrate on my specific interests.
Now - what chance had the mind of an intellectual in 17th century AD or 7th AD or 7th BC to capture the situation of 17th/18th BC in a "realistic fiction"?
What is the difference between 1000, 2000, 3000 years distance to an action? In any case, it's always much time and too much to be very wise about the concentrated object - or one must have really good informations.
This was hard to gather in 17th century and much easier in our time.
So if I declare "these fictions of 17th" as probable unrealistic and try to build a better fiction - I guess, this is a realistic attempt with good chances to achieve really a better result.
Well, my theme is the didactical situation of a reading/writing teacher in 17th/18th century BC. How would he behave? What was his action? I assume, he was didactical clever.
What's wrong at this assumption? You prefer him to be stupid? Actually the Sepher Yetzirah writer assumed him to be Abraham.
I don't follow this "fiction" and assume it was a Phoenecian according to the current available information in my time, that the earliest alphabet using scriptures was found in this region (the Sepher Yetzirah author is excused, he really couldn't know that). .
The Sepher Yetzirah author assumes, that there was a relation between letters and parts of the body.
Yes, I say, that's a good idea, I see that in the names of the letters. The Sepher Yetzirah sees it different and thinks that this belongs to the 12 simple letters of its time, as itself defines them.
I say "No", that was different. The 12 parts of a body were ordered in a most simple way according to the special interests of the teacher to be as simple as possible. I think that's realism.
The Sepher Yetzirah makes a hero of the master of Alphabet. I think, that is not realism. When things start, they always start simple and nobody knows, if they finally will be successful. It doesn't need a "god-selected hero", ... a humble man like Sagramoro is good enough, for instance in the case of the most influential 5x14-deck.
Masters are not necessarily born by virgins.
But that's not really interesting. The real point is, where is the body of the ABC-man. I wonder, why you didn't take a try of the riddle instead of hunting me with details, which are relevant 1000 and more years after the time that I discuss.
Ross G Caldwell
Re:
Sorry, I don't see it. An eye, a head, a mouth, a tooth. Why is the eye above the head? Or why is the tooth above it if you count backwards?
I'll play dumb a little while longer.
Huck said:
Oh, no ... it's a training program for intuitive thinking ..
Well, the Sepher Yetzirah author gives the hint, that 12 letters are related to the human body.
It's not, that the Sepher Yetzirah should be seen as authority in this matter, it's late and somehow "forges", but some of its content are old and with that "real" for our problem around 17th/18th BC.
12 for the body. 12 for the ABC-man.
How much we've seen? How much had the head?
Sorry, I don't see it. An eye, a head, a mouth, a tooth. Why is the eye above the head? Or why is the tooth above it if you count backwards?
I'll play dumb a little while longer.
Ross G Caldwell
Hi Kwaw
I got some more helpful responses from some scholars, with further articles to read etc.: -
"Dear Ross,
First of all, alef appears about half a dozen times meaning ox in Dt
7:13; 28:4; 18:51; Is 30:24; Ps 8:8; 50:10 and Prv 14:4, and is cognate with Akkadian alpu, so there's nothing special about the word.
As for the letter names in Hebrew, there is no ancient list of the names, but you should have a look at an article which appeared several years ago in Vetus Testamentum by Moshe Garsiel in which he claims that certain of the biblical acrostics start certain verses not only with the letter required by the acrostic but by a word with the name of the letter. So in Prov. 31:19, 20 the yod and kaf veerses of the Woman of Valor acrostic begin with yadeha and kappah. Ps 34:16 the `ayin verse begins
`eyney; Ps. 145 14,15 the samekh and `ayin verses start with somek and `eyney, vs 17 cadi starts with cadiq; Ps. 119:17 the gimel verses begin with demol; 63 the yod verses begin with yadeka; 137 the cadi verses begin with cadiq. I too, on the basis of Garsiel have referred to this phenomenon in some of the articles I"ve written about biblical acrostics. All this shows that even though we dont have any formal list of letter names formr the biblical period, the names were in fact known and used as
a facto in literary creativity. On the other hand, there may have been shorter names such as waw, caw, qaw and taw (cf. Is 28:10:13) if we believe Torcyner on the Is 28:10, 13). So
there may have been parallel systems of naming the letters."
Another -
"Driver, Semitic Writing -- there are a lot of references under <'lp> in the index of Hebrew words, too many to go through now ... The only substantial articles I've seen recently deal with the date of the Greek transfer (a major review article of B. B. Powell's silly book in BiOr, with references and responses), but not with letter names."
So it is attested, and is in Akkadian too as alpu.
Ross
kwaw said:
I got some more helpful responses from some scholars, with further articles to read etc.: -
"Dear Ross,
First of all, alef appears about half a dozen times meaning ox in Dt
7:13; 28:4; 18:51; Is 30:24; Ps 8:8; 50:10 and Prv 14:4, and is cognate with Akkadian alpu, so there's nothing special about the word.
As for the letter names in Hebrew, there is no ancient list of the names, but you should have a look at an article which appeared several years ago in Vetus Testamentum by Moshe Garsiel in which he claims that certain of the biblical acrostics start certain verses not only with the letter required by the acrostic but by a word with the name of the letter. So in Prov. 31:19, 20 the yod and kaf veerses of the Woman of Valor acrostic begin with yadeha and kappah. Ps 34:16 the `ayin verse begins
`eyney; Ps. 145 14,15 the samekh and `ayin verses start with somek and `eyney, vs 17 cadi starts with cadiq; Ps. 119:17 the gimel verses begin with demol; 63 the yod verses begin with yadeka; 137 the cadi verses begin with cadiq. I too, on the basis of Garsiel have referred to this phenomenon in some of the articles I"ve written about biblical acrostics. All this shows that even though we dont have any formal list of letter names formr the biblical period, the names were in fact known and used as
a facto in literary creativity. On the other hand, there may have been shorter names such as waw, caw, qaw and taw (cf. Is 28:10:13) if we believe Torcyner on the Is 28:10, 13). So
there may have been parallel systems of naming the letters."
Another -
"Driver, Semitic Writing -- there are a lot of references under <'lp> in the index of Hebrew words, too many to go through now ... The only substantial articles I've seen recently deal with the date of the Greek transfer (a major review article of B. B. Powell's silly book in BiOr, with references and responses), but not with letter names."
So it is attested, and is in Akkadian too as alpu.
Ross
Ross G Caldwell
Earliest list of Greek names -
"Athenaeus 453d "ca. 200 CE, purportedly but dubiously reproducing a 5th-century BCE text," as I put it in *Handbook of Linguistics*" (Peter Daniels)
Thanks again to our knowledgable experts.
This list appears in a 10th century codice, brought by Aurispa from Constantinople to Italy in 1423 ($=ksi)
alfa
bhta
gamma
delta
ei
zht'
hta
8ht'
iwta
kappa
labda
mu
nu
$ei
ou
pei
rw
sigma
tau
u
fei
xei
psei
w
[Athenaeus "Dipnosophistarum" (ed. Kaibel, Teubner 1885) 453d (BK I, 79=vol. II, p.485 ll. 15-18)]
Ross
"Athenaeus 453d "ca. 200 CE, purportedly but dubiously reproducing a 5th-century BCE text," as I put it in *Handbook of Linguistics*" (Peter Daniels)
Thanks again to our knowledgable experts.
This list appears in a 10th century codice, brought by Aurispa from Constantinople to Italy in 1423 ($=ksi)
alfa
bhta
gamma
delta
ei
zht'
hta
8ht'
iwta
kappa
labda
mu
nu
$ei
ou
pei
rw
sigma
tau
u
fei
xei
psei
w
[Athenaeus "Dipnosophistarum" (ed. Kaibel, Teubner 1885) 453d (BK I, 79=vol. II, p.485 ll. 15-18)]
Ross
firemaiden
This is fun, Ross, thank you for posting the communications from your expert colleagues. Can they tell us what is the linguistic relationship between the semitic phoenician language, and Aramaic?
Can they tell us what is the linguistic relationship between the semitic phoenician language, and Aramaic?Huck
Re: Re:
What's so difficult ...
A good teacher teaches by letting pupils play ... And he paints a little and then his strokes are suddenly the Alphabet, that what should be learnt. A good didactical princip.
Of course the Alphabet-man appears in one row, why, why he should make anything difficult, he's not a mystery-man, our teacher, he has very humble pupils, he wants to make them understand.
12 letters refer to the body, so the Sepher Yetzirah says it, and so it is:
And Iod is 10 and it means a hand with 10 fingers .... something must be wrong with me, mine has only 5.
And what part of the body means 20?
10th = 10: Iod = Hand ?
11th = 20: ... ?
12th: ..... ?
13th: ....... ?
14th: ........ ?
15th: ......... ?
16th: eye
17th: mouth
18th: fish-hook (nose)
19th: <----- logic demands the ear here, it's quof, the back-head
20th: head
21th: tooth ----> means: show teeth, means: "smile"
22th: and here's the mark --- I did it, I sign with a cross, I know the alphabet know.
And now with music:
I am the ABC-man, ho, ho ...
I am the ABC-man, ho, ho ...
I am the ABC-man, ho, ho ...
... old tradition, pupils love jokes and music
Well, you've a face and a head ....
..... but where is your body?
What feels good like a fish in the water?
.... what's the story of Osiris and what's the 14th part of his body, for which Isis had to take special care for?
.... and why look m and n so similar
Autorbis saw (in reality, once in last century, in the time, when he worked about the theme) a tiger and it was an alphabet-tiger, painted with Arabian letters, it was just an artistic idea to express the Alphabet.
.... And the teeth are the last cause the "smile"
Ross G Caldwell said:
What's so difficult ...
A good teacher teaches by letting pupils play ... And he paints a little and then his strokes are suddenly the Alphabet, that what should be learnt. A good didactical princip.
Of course the Alphabet-man appears in one row, why, why he should make anything difficult, he's not a mystery-man, our teacher, he has very humble pupils, he wants to make them understand.
12 letters refer to the body, so the Sepher Yetzirah says it, and so it is:
And Iod is 10 and it means a hand with 10 fingers .... something must be wrong with me, mine has only 5.
And what part of the body means 20?
10th = 10: Iod = Hand ?
11th = 20: ... ?
12th: ..... ?
13th: ....... ?
14th: ........ ?
15th: ......... ?
16th: eye
17th: mouth
18th: fish-hook (nose)
19th: <----- logic demands the ear here, it's quof, the back-head
20th: head
21th: tooth ----> means: show teeth, means: "smile
"22th: and here's the mark --- I did it, I sign with a cross, I know the alphabet know.
And now with music:
I am the ABC-man, ho, ho ...
I am the ABC-man, ho, ho ...
I am the ABC-man, ho, ho ...
... old tradition, pupils love jokes and music Well, you've a face and a head ....
..... but where is your body?
What feels good like a fish in the water?
.... what's the story of Osiris and what's the 14th part of his body, for which Isis had to take special care for?
.... and why look m and n so similar
Autorbis saw (in reality, once in last century, in the time, when he worked about the theme) a tiger and it was an alphabet-tiger, painted with Arabian letters, it was just an artistic idea to express the Alphabet.
.... And the teeth are the last cause the "smile"
