9149Qeiyafa inscription 'ALT`S and ShPT.
- Nov 2, 2008Victor
That is exactly why I was careful to say "a new version"
And now the discussion has started raging over lo' (thou shalt not)
and 'al (which I had thought implied Please do not or Kindly refrain
from in classical usage).
I will respond to Yitzhak Sapir tomorrow.
1.33 am on Monday 3rd of Novemeber, I think; my luakh says 5 Kheshvan
On 2/11/2008, at 7:09 PM, victor avigdor hurowitz wrote:
> In the versions of the Ten Commandments I know, the negative is Lo
> and not
> Victor Hurowitz
> On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 5:49 AM, Brian Colless wrote:
>> Yitzhak Sapir said:
>>> What you read as a B, Haggai Misgav reads a Lamed whose top has
>> been cut off. This makes for the aleph-lamed, taw-ayin of ×× ×ª×¢×©
>> do.") <
>> On 'A L T ` Â´S as "Do not do"
>> What have we here? A copy of the Ten Commandments? Or a new version?
>> "Do not make [a pesel]"
> Dear Brian,
> I did not mean to second guess Haggai Misgav. He is the one who has
> qualifications to read this inscription as well as the necessary
> and at this point, apparently, this is not even sufficient for trying
> to read more
> than a handful of words. Those letters there on the second line may
> be the
> ones Haggai Misgav reads as "judge" -- I don't know where the word
> appears. I feel that the Sin on the first line has only two <
> marks, whereas
> the ones I identified as Mem on the second line have three or four
> (and the
> second has them going >). I did this because I realized that the
> "Don't do" are legible on the photo, and also because someone asked
> the Proto-Canaanite forms are substantiated in the photo. Again, I
> did not
> mean to second-guess Haggai Misgav in his reading and if he, with
> all the
> information he has available is not willing to go much further, we
> Yitzhak Sapir
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>