At the same time, the normal size for Hebrew/Aramaic scripts shrank considerably, the pen strokes became mostly monotone and unshaded, and the scripts became more rectilinear, angular, bilinear, and square. Jewish writers in the third century bce adopted the Greek split-nibbed reed pen, which dramatically changed the appearance of Hebrew/Aramaic scripts. In this comparative study, I argue that Egyptian and Judean Hebrew/Aramaic scripts from 400 bce to 400 ce were heavily influenced by Greek and later Latin writing cultures, which explains many previously inexplicable phenomena. Writing is an expression of culture and is subject to intercultural influences. The purpose of the present study is therefore to provide the reader with a comprehensive statistical overview of language use in the epigraphic sources What has largely gone unnoticed, meanwhile, are the conclusions drawn by archaeologists, epigraphists and palaeographists concerning the language use in the epigraphic material discovered over the past century. While, however, the documents from the Judaean Desert have been subject to intensive study and scholarly debate not only among archaeologists and linguists, but also among biblical scholars, the inscriptions and ostraca have largely been neglected by New Testament scholarship, probably due to their meager theological content and the lack of any direct links to New Testament literature, with a few exceptions like the “Pontius Pilatus” inscription from Caesaraea, a few “qorban” inscriptions, the ossuary of “Alexander, son of Simon, from Cyrene”, or, for those with a more sensational interest, the famous “Jesus ben Joseph” ossuary from Talpiot, together with its companion, the “James Ossuary”. In addition, ongoing archaeological work has brought to light a vast number of inscriptions, ostraca and other epigraphical material. Starting with the discoveries in the Cairo Genizah, and continuing with the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Bar Kochba letters and other documentary texts from the Judaean desert, the landscape of Hebrew and Aramaic literature from the Second Temple Period has changed dramatically. This situation has changed dramatically in the course of the past century. However, the textual evidence they could base their conclusions on was thin at that time: No literature, neither Hebrew nor Aramaic, was extant from the period in question and archaeological research in the land of Israel had only just begun. The widespread conviction among New Testament scholars that Aramaic, and not Hebrew, should be considered the “Jewish vernacular” of the first century CE and therefore the “mother tongue of Jesus”, was shaped in the 19th century by prominent scholars like Abraham Geiger and Gustaf Dalman who were, without doubt, experts in their field. Consequently, those who were scrupulous about observing the laws of ritual purity refrained from using the square script for mundane purposes and used the Paleo-Hebrew script instead. The article shows that, in the Second Temple period, the square script was considered holy. Studies of the Dead Sea Scrolls commonly premise that greater holiness and value was attached to the Paleo-Hebrew script than to the square script. One common view is that because the Hasmoneans and the rebels in both revolts sought to establish their sovereignty, they employed symbols of Jewish significance and the archaic and obsolete – but prestigious – Paleo-Hebrew script, which was a reminder of the glorious past. The most representative artefacts bearing inscriptions in the Paleo-Hebrew script are Jewish coins of that time and the Dead Sea Scrolls. From the Persian period until the Bar Kokhba Rebellion, Paleo-Hebrew script was used in various Jewish contexts (official, sacred, funerary) and on a variety of substrates (parchment, stone, coins, and pottery). The article focuses on the use of the Paleo-Hebrew script versus the square script (known also as “Jewish script” or “Assyrian”) by the Jews of Judea during the Hellenistic and Roman periods.

Paleo hebrew font free download