The Alphabet
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Planning and Injustice in Tel-Aviv/Jaffa Urban Segregation in Tel-Aviv’S First Decades
Planning and Injustice in Tel-Aviv/Jaffa Urban Segregation in Tel-Aviv’s First Decades Rotem Erez June 7th, 2016 Supervisor: Dr. Stefan Kipfer A Major Paper submitted to the Faculty of Environmental Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Environmental Studies, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Student Signature: _____________________ Supervisor Signature:_____________________ Contents Contents .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Table of Figures ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Abstract .............................................................................................................................................4 Foreword ...........................................................................................................................................6 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................9 Chapter 1: A Comparative Study of the Early Years of Colonial Casablanca and Tel-Aviv ..................... 19 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 19 Historical Background ............................................................................................................................ -
TAU Archaeology the Jacob M
TAU Archaeology The Jacob M. Alkow Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Cultures and The Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology The Lester and Sally Entin Faculty of Humanities | Tel Aviv University Number 4 | Summer 2018 Golden Jubilee Edition 1968–2018 TAU Archaeology Newsletter of The Jacob M. Alkow Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Cultures and The Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology The Lester and Sally Entin Faculty of Humanities Number 4 | Summer 2018 Editor: Alexandra Wrathall Graphics: Noa Evron Board: Oded Lipschits Ran Barkai Ido Koch Nirit Kedem Contact the editors and editorial board: [email protected] Discover more: Institute: archaeology.tau.ac.il Department: archaeo.tau.ac.il Cover Image: Professor Yohanan Aharoni teaching Tel Aviv University students in the field, during the 1969 season of the Tel Beer-sheba Expedition. (Courtesy of the Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University). Photo retouched by Sasha Flit and Yonatan Kedem. ISSN: 2521-0971 | EISSN: 252-098X Contents Message from the Chair of the Department and the Director of the Institute 2 Fieldwork 3 Tel Shimron, 2017 | Megan Sauter, Daniel M. Master, and Mario A.S. Martin 4 Excavation on the Western Slopes of the City of David (‘Giv’ati’), 2018 | Yuval Gadot and Yiftah Shalev 5 Exploring the Medieval Landscape of Khirbet Beit Mamzil, Jerusalem, 2018 | Omer Ze'evi, Yelena Elgart-Sharon, and Yuval Gadot 6 Central Timna Valley Excavations, 2018 | Erez Ben-Yosef and Benjamin -
A Critique of L2/18-276
A Critique of L2/18-276 Abe Meyers* November 30, 2018 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Multiple incompatible representations 2 2.1 <gimel-daleth-yodh> + <shin> vs <aleph-heth> + <aleph-heth> 3 2.2 <Fixed-aleph> + <gimel-daleth-yodh> vs <fixed-gimel-daleth-yodth> + <aleph> ............................. 3 2.3 <gimel-daleth-yodth> + <gimel-daleth> vs <samekh> . 3 2.4 <pe> vs <sadhe> ......................... 4 3 Miscellaneous issues 4 3.1 Joining of <aleph-heth> ..................... 5 3.2 Missing alternate form of <gimel-daleth-yodh> . 5 3.3 Inclusion of <HE> ......................... 5 3.4 Joining of <zayin> ........................ 5 3.5 Old lamedth . 5 4 The dogma of shape-shifting and the problem of good-enough 5 5 Bibliography 6 1 Introduction It has been a source of delight that after a dormant period of four years, since the submission of my proposal to encode Book Pahlavi in the Unicode *abraham.meyers AT orientology DOT ca 1 standard, there has been some renewed activity in the community. The recent preliminary proposal by Dr. Anshuman Pandey (L2/18-276) might therefore signal a resurgence of activities towards the noble goal of encoding of Book Pahlavi in the Unicode standard. I started reading the work of Dr. Pandey with enthusiasm and in antic- ipation of further improvement and suggestions and perhaps discovery of new characters. It was indeed pleasant to see a relatively thorough classica- tion of the visual joining of the stem of the characters of Book Pahlavi, while taking the base-line into consideration. Such studies will be very benecial for the future type designers of Book Pahlavialthough I have doubts about the applicability of this study to the level of abstraction pertaining to the Unicode standard. -
The Personal Name Here Is Again Obscure. At
342 THE FIRST ARAMAIC INSCRIPTION FROM INDIA 1. 10 : " his conduct " ? 1. 11 : " and also his sons." 1. 12 : the personal name here is again obscure. At the end of the line are traces of the right-hand side of a letter, which might be samekh or beth; if we accept the former, it is possible to vocalize as Pavira-ram, i.e. Pavira-rdja, corresponding to the Sanskrit Pravira- rdja. The name Pravira is well known in epos, and might well be borne by a real man ; and the change of a sonant to a surd consonant, such as that of j to «, is quite common in the North-West dialects. L. D. BARNETT. THE FIRST ARAMAIC INSCRIPTION FROM INDIA I must thank Mr. F. W. Thomas for his great kindness in sending me the photograph taken by Sir J. H. Marshall, and also Dr. Barnett for letting me see his tracing and transliteration. The facsimile is made from the photo- graph, which is as good as it can be. Unfortunately, on the original, the letters are as white as the rest of the marble, and it was necessary to darken them in order to obtain a photograph. This process inti'oduces an element of uncertainty, since in some cases part of a line may have escaped, and in others an accidental scratch may appear as part of a letter. Hence the following passages are more or less doubtful: line 4, 3PI; 1. 6, Tpfl; 1. 8, "123 and y\; 1. 9, the seventh and ninth letters; 1. 10, ID; 1. -
Three Conquests of Canaan
ÅA Wars in the Middle East are almost an every day part of Eero Junkkaala:of Three Canaan Conquests our lives, and undeniably the history of war in this area is very long indeed. This study examines three such wars, all of which were directed against the Land of Canaan. Two campaigns were conducted by Egyptian Pharaohs and one by the Israelites. The question considered being Eero Junkkaala whether or not these wars really took place. This study gives one methodological viewpoint to answer this ques- tion. The author studies the archaeology of all the geo- Three Conquests of Canaan graphical sites mentioned in the lists of Thutmosis III and A Comparative Study of Two Egyptian Military Campaigns and Shishak and compares them with the cities mentioned in Joshua 10-12 in the Light of Recent Archaeological Evidence the Conquest stories in the Book of Joshua. Altogether 116 sites were studied, and the com- parison between the texts and the archaeological results offered a possibility of establishing whether the cities mentioned, in the sources in question, were inhabited, and, furthermore, might have been destroyed during the time of the Pharaohs and the biblical settlement pe- riod. Despite the nature of the two written sources being so very different it was possible to make a comparative study. This study gives a fresh view on the fierce discus- sion concerning the emergence of the Israelites. It also challenges both Egyptological and biblical studies to use the written texts and the archaeological material togeth- er so that they are not so separated from each other, as is often the case. -
Page 1 CHAPTER EIGHTEEN on INFIĀL and IFTIĀL These Two Verb
CHAPTER EIGHTEEN ON INFIʿĀL AND IFTIʿĀL These two verb types are intransitive. Conjugational patterns of .הִבָנֵה ,הִשָׁחֵט ,הִמָלֵט ,.the type of inʿāl do not contain a taw, e.g A conjugational pattern of the type of iftiʿāl has a taw that nev- -The taw of iftiʿāl does not oc .הִתְאַמֵץ ,הִתְמַכֵר er disappears, as in cur between radicals, unless the #rst radical is a samekh, a ṣadi or a shin. Other letters do not come before the taw, as do samekh, ,(Micah 6:16) וישתמר חקות עמרי ,(Eccl. 12:5) ויסתבל החגב ,.ṣadi and shin, e.g and similar cases. An exception to this is one word beginning in a -Jer. 49:3), in which the taw occurs be) והתשוטטנה בגדרות ,shin, namely fore the shin. As for ṣadi, they said that the people of the lan- guage substituted a ṭet for the taw after the ṣadi in order to ease ומה ,(Josh. 9:4) וילכו ויצטירו ,(Josh. 9:12) חם הצטידנו אותו ,.pronunciation, e.g .(Gen. 44:16) נצטדק Take note that the taw of iftiʿāl cannot be confused with the fu- ture pre#x taw, because the taw of iftiʿāl is stable in the entire paradigm, but the future pre#x taw is not. Moreover, the vocali- sation of the taw of iftiʿāl is a shewa in all cases when it does not occur between the #rst and the second radical. But the pre#xes can be vocalised with a shewa or other vowels. Moreover, a א֗ ֗ י ֗ נ ת֗ word can never begin in the taw of iftiʿāl, but another letter must come before it, be it a heh, a mem, or a future pre#x. -
An Introduction to Old Persian Prods Oktor Skjærvø
An Introduction to Old Persian Prods Oktor Skjærvø Copyright © 2016 by Prods Oktor Skjærvø Please do not cite in print without the author’s permission. This Introduction may be distributed freely as a service to teachers and students of Old Iranian. In my experience, it can be taught as a one-term full course at 4 hrs/w. My thanks to all of my students and colleagues, who have actively noted typos, inconsistencies of presentation, etc. TABLE OF CONTENTS Select bibliography ................................................................................................................................... 9 Sigla and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................... 12 Lesson 1 ..................................................................................................................................................... 13 Old Persian and old Iranian. .................................................................................................................... 13 Script. Origin. .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Script. Writing system. ........................................................................................................................... 14 The syllabary. .......................................................................................................................................... 15 Logograms. ............................................................................................................................................ -
Proto-Elamite
L2/20192 20200921 Preliminary proposal to encode ProtoElamite in Unicode Anshuman Pandey [email protected] pandey.github.io/unicode September 21, 2020 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Overview of the Sign Repertoire 3 2.1 Sign names . 4 2.2 Numeric signs . 4 2.3 Numeric signs with extended representations . 5 2.4 Complex capacity signs . 6 2.5 Complex graphemes . 7 2.6 Signs in compounds without independent attestation . 10 2.7 Alternate or variant forms . 11 2.8 Scribal designs . 11 3 Proposed Encoding Model 12 4 Proposed Characters 13 4.1 Numeric signs . 13 4.2 General ideographic signs . 17 5 Characters Not Suitable for Encoding 110 6 References 110 7 Acknowledgments 111 1 Preliminary proposal to encode ProtoElamite in Unicode Anshuman Pandey 1 Introduction The term ‘ProtoElamite’ refers to a writing system that was used at the beginning of the 3rd millenium BCE in the region to the east and southeast of Mesopotamia, known as Elam, which corresponds to the eastern portion of presentday Iran. The name was assigned by the French epigraphist JeanVincent Scheil in the early 20th century, who believed it to be the predecessor of a ‘proper’ Elamite script, which would have been used for recording the Elamite language, simply on account of the location of the tablets at Susa, which was the capital city of Elam. While no ‘proper’ descendent of the script has been identified, scholars continue to use the name ‘ProtoElamite’ as a matter of convention (Dahl 2012: 2). ProtoElamite is believed to have been developed from an accounting system used in Mesopotamia, in a manner similar to the development of ‘ProtoCuneiform’. -
Lachish Fortifications and State Formation in the Biblical Kingdom
Radiocarbon, Vol 00, Nr 00, 2019, p 1–18 DOI:10.1017/RDC.2019.5 © 2019 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona LACHISH FORTIFICATIONS AND STATE FORMATION IN THE BIBLICAL KINGDOM OF JUDAH IN LIGHT OF RADIOMETRIC DATINGS Yosef Garfinkel1* • Michael G Hasel2 • Martin G Klingbeil2 • Hoo-Goo Kang3 • Gwanghyun Choi1 • Sang-Yeup Chang1 • Soonhwa Hong4 • Saar Ganor5 • Igor Kreimerman1 • Christopher Bronk Ramsey6 1Institute of Archaeology, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel 2Institute of Archaeology, Southern Adventist University, USA 3Seoul Jangsin University, Korea 4Institute of Bible Geography of Korea, Korea 5Israel Antiquities Authority, Israel 6Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, UK ABSTRACT. When and where the process of state formation took place in the biblical kingdom of Judah is heavily debated. Our regional project in the southwestern part of Judah, carried out from 2007 to the present, includes the excavation of three Iron Age sites: Khirbet Qeiyafa, Tel Lachish, and Khirbet al-Ra’i. New cultural horizons and new fortification systems have been uncovered, and these discoveries have been dated by 59 radiometric determinations. The controversial question of when the kingdom was able to build a fortified city at Lachish, its foremost center after Jerusalem, is now resolved thanks to the excavation of a previously unknown city wall, dated by radiocarbon (14C) to the second half of the 10th century BCE. KEYWORDS: Iron Age, Kingdom of Judah, Khirbet al-Ra’i, Khirbet Qeiyafa, Lachish, radiometric chronology. INTRODUCTION The debate over the chronology of the Iron Age is one of the central controversies in the current scholarship of the archaeology of the southern Levant as well as biblical studies. -
Ancient Scripts
The Unicode® Standard Version 13.0 – Core Specification To learn about the latest version of the Unicode Standard, see http://www.unicode.org/versions/latest/. Many of the designations used by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their products are claimed as trademarks. Where those designations appear in this book, and the publisher was aware of a trade- mark claim, the designations have been printed with initial capital letters or in all capitals. Unicode and the Unicode Logo are registered trademarks of Unicode, Inc., in the United States and other countries. The authors and publisher have taken care in the preparation of this specification, but make no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assume no responsibility for errors or omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of the use of the information or programs contained herein. The Unicode Character Database and other files are provided as-is by Unicode, Inc. No claims are made as to fitness for any particular purpose. No warranties of any kind are expressed or implied. The recipient agrees to determine applicability of information provided. © 2020 Unicode, Inc. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by copyright, and permission must be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction. For information regarding permissions, inquire at http://www.unicode.org/reporting.html. For information about the Unicode terms of use, please see http://www.unicode.org/copyright.html. The Unicode Standard / the Unicode Consortium; edited by the Unicode Consortium. — Version 13.0. Includes index. ISBN 978-1-936213-26-9 (http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode13.0.0/) 1. -
History of Writing
History of Writing On present archaeological evidence, full writing appeared in Mesopotamia and Egypt around the same time, in the century or so before 3000 BC. It is probable that it started slightly earlier in Mesopotamia, given the date of the earliest proto-writing on clay tablets from Uruk, circa 3300 BC, and the much longer history of urban development in Mesopotamia compared to the Nile Valley of Egypt. However we cannot be sure about the date of the earliest known Egyptian historical inscription, a monumental slate palette of King Narmer, on which his name is written in two hieroglyphs showing a fish and a chisel. Narmer’s date is insecure, but probably falls in the period 3150 to 3050 BC. In China, full writing first appears on the so-called ‘oracle bones’ of the Shang civilization, found about a century ago at Anyang in north China, dated to 1200 BC. Many of their signs bear an undoubted resemblance to modern Chinese characters, and it is a fairly straightforward task for scholars to read them. However, there are much older signs on the pottery of the Yangshao culture, dating from 5000 to 4000 BC, which may conceivably be precursors of an older form of full Chinese writing, still to be discovered; many areas of China have yet to be archaeologically excavated. In Europe, the oldest full writing is the Linear A script found in Crete in 1900. Linear A dates from about 1750 BC. Although it is undeciphered, its signs closely resemble the somewhat younger, deciphered Linear B script, which is known to be full writing; Linear B was used to write an archaic form of the Greek language. -
The University of Chicago Oriental Institute Seminars Number 2
oi.uchicago.edu i THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ORIENTAL INSTITUTE SEMINARS NUMBER 2 Series Editors Leslie Schramer and Thomas G. Urban oi.uchicago.edu ii oi.uchicago.edu iii MARGINS OF WRITING, ORIGINS OF CULTURES edited by SETH L. SANDERS with contributions by Seth L. Sanders, John Kelly, Gonzalo Rubio, Jacco Dieleman, Jerrold Cooper, Christopher Woods, Annick Payne, William Schniedewind, Michael Silverstein, Piotr Michalowski, Paul-Alain Beaulieu, Theo van den Hout, Paul Zimansky, Sheldon Pollock, and Peter Machinist THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ORIENTAL INSTITUTE SEMINARS • NUMBER 2 CHICAGO • ILLINOIS oi.uchicago.edu iv Library of Congress Control Number: 2005938897 ISBN: 1-885923-39-2 ©2006 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. Published 2006. Printed in the United States of America. The Oriental Institute, Chicago Co-managing Editors Thomas A. Holland and Thomas G. Urban Series Editors’ Acknowledgments The assistance of Katie L. Johnson is acknowledged in the production of this volume. Front Cover Illustration A teacher holding class in a village on the Island of Argo, Sudan. January 1907. Photograph by James Henry Breasted. Oriental Institute photograph P B924 Printed by McNaughton & Gunn, Saline, Michigan The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Infor- mation Services — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. oi.uchicago.edu v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................................