The Mesad Hashavyahu Ostracon (7th c. BCE)
BiblicalHebrew.com, 2022
The Meแนฃad Hฬฃashavyahu ostracon, also known as the Yavne-Yam ostracon, was found in a guard room of a fortress south of Yavne-Yam. While the original name of the fort is unknown, it is referred to in Modern Hebrew as ืืืฆื ืืฉืืืื meแนฃad hฬฃashavyahu. The text should probably be dated to the latter part of the seventh century BCE during the reign of King Josiah. The letter is written in good Judean Hebrew style and the script clearly reflects a well-trained scribe. The content of the ostracon is a letter of complaint from a tenant farmer against Hoshayahu, who apparently had taken the complainantโs garment and not returned it. The voice of the complainant comes through the inscription vividly, as you can imagine him dictating it to the scribe with great emotion (Ahฬฃituv 2008, 156โ158). The inscription reads as follows:
Original Text
๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค
๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค
๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค
๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค
๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค
๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค [๐ค]๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค ๐ค
๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค
๐ค. ๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค
๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค
๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค . ๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค.
๐ค]๐ค[๐ค๐ค] ๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค . ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค
๐ค๐ค ๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค] ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค
๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค] ๐ค๐ค[๐ค๐ค ๐ค ๐ค๐ค]๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค . ๐ค๐ค
๐ค๐ค ๐ค ๐ค๐ค]๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค [๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค]๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค
๐ค]
Transcription with Audio (Ancient Script)
| Ancient Script | Historical Pronunciation | Translation |
๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค | jiสหmaส สadoหหnajj haษฌ-หษฌar | โMay my lord, the commander, hear!โ |
๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค | หสit daหbar สabหduh | โthe word of his servantโ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค | สabหdak qoหหแนฃir haหjaห สabหdak | โyour servantโyour servant would harvestโ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค | ba-ฤงaหแนฃir สaหsam | โin Haแนฃar Asamโ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค | wa-jiqหแนฃur สabหdak | โand your servant harvestedโ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค | wa-jiหkall wa-สaหsoหm ka-jaหmiหm | โand finished and stored as alwaysโ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค | la-paหnaj สabหbat | โbefore Sabbathโ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค [๐ค]๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค | kaหสisr kilหlaห สabหdak หสit qaแนฃiหหroห(h) | โWhen your servant finished his harvestโ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค | wa-สaหsoหm ka-jaหmiหm | โand stored as alwaysโ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค | wa-jaหboห(ส) hawสiสหjaหhuห หbin สoหหbaj | โthen came Hoshayahu, the son of Shobayโ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค | wa-jiqหqiฤง หสit หbigd สabหdak | โand took the garment of your servantโ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค | kaหสiสr kilหleหtiห หสit qaแนฃiหหriห | โwhen I completed my harvestโ |
๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค | หzeห jaหmiหm | โas alwaysโ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค | laหqaฤง หสit หbigd สabหdak | โhe took the garment of your servantโ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค . ๐ค๐ค | wa-หkull สaฯหฯajj jiสหnuห หliห | โand all my brothers will testify for meโ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค | haq-qoหแนฃiหriหm สitหtiห | โwho harvested with meโ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค. [๐ค]๐ค[๐ค๐ค | ba-หฤงumm haส-หสamส | โin the heat of the sunโ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค . ๐ค๐ค | สaฯหฯajj jiสหnuห หliห สaหmin | โmy brothers will testify for me. Amen.โ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค[๐ค๐ค | niqหqeหtiห miส-สaหสam | โI am innocent from any guiltโ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค] ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค | wa-หสatt jaหสib naห(ส) หสit bigหdiห | โand now, let him return my garment!โ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค. ๐ค๐ค๐ค | wa-สimalหli(ส) laษฌ-หษฌar | โAnd I call out to the commanderโ |
๐ค๐ค๐ค[๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค] ๐ค๐ค[๐ค๐ค | la-haหสiหb หสit หbigd สabหdak | โto return the garment of your servantโ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค]๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค[๐ค๐ค | wa-titหtin สiหlaw raฤงหmiหm | โand grant him mercyโ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค]๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค [๐ค๐ค๐ค ๐ค]๐ค๐ค๐ค | wa-hiสหbitt หสit หbigd สabหdak | โand return the garment of your servantโ |
๐ค ๐ค๐ค ๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค๐ค | wa-หloห(ส) taddiหหฤงinnuห | โand do not drive him away!โ |
Transcription with Audio (Modern Script)
| Modern Script | Modern Pointed | Translation |
ืืฉืืข ืืื ื. ืืฉืจ | ืึดืฉืึฐืึทืข ืึฒืึนื ึดื ืึทืฉืึผึทืจ | โMay my lord, the commander, hear!โ |
ืืช ืืืจ ืขืืื | ืึถืช ืึผึฐืึทืจ ืขึทืึฐืึผึนื | โthe word of his servantโ |
ืขืืื ืงืฆืจ. ืืื. ืขืืื | ืขึทืึฐืึผึฐืึธ ืงึนืฆึตืจ ืึธืึธื ืขึทืึฐืึผึฐืึธ | โyour servantโyour servant would harvestโ |
ืืืฆืจ ืืกื | ืึผึทืึฒืฆึทืจ ืึธืกึธื | โin Haแนฃar Asamโ |
ืืืงืฆืจ ืขืืื | ืึทืึผึดืงึฐืฆึนืจ ืขึทืึฐืึผึฐืึธ | โand your servant harvestedโ |
ืืืื ืืืกื ืืืื | ืึทืึฐืึทื ืึฐืึธืกึนื ืึผึทืึผึธืึดื | โand finished and stored as alwaysโ |
ืืคื ื ืฉืืช | ืึดืคึฐื ึตื ืฉืึทืึผึธืช | โbefore Sabbathโ |
ืืืฉืจ ืื [ืข]ืืื ืืช ืงืฆืจ | ืึผึทืึฒืฉืึถืจ ืึผึดืึผึธ [ืขึท]ืึฐืึผึฐืึธ ืึถืช ืงึฐืฆึดืจึน | โWhen your servant finished his harvestโ |
ืืืกื ืืืื | ืึฐืึธืกึนื ืึผึทืึผึธืึดื | โand stored as alwaysโ |
ืืืื ืืืฉืขืืื ืื ืฉืื | ืึทืึผึธืึนื ืืึนืฉืึทืขึฐืึธืืึผ ืึผึถื ืฉืึนืึทื | โthen came Hoshayahu, the son of Shobayโ |
ืืืงื. ืืช ืืื ืขืืื | ืึทืึผึดืงึผึทื ืึถืช ืึผึถืึถื ืขึทืึฐืึผึฐืึธ | โand took the garment of your servantโ |
ืืืฉืจ ืืืช ืืช ืงืฆืจื | ืึผึทืึฒืฉืึถืจ ืึผึดืึผึตืชึด ืึถืช ืงึฐืฆึดืจึดื | โwhen I completed my harvestโ |
ืื ืืื | ืึถื ืึธืึดื | โas alwaysโ |
ืืงื ืืช ืืื ืขืืื | ืึธืงึทื ืึถืช ืึผึถืึถื ืขึทืึฐืึผึฐืึธ | โhe took the garment of your servantโ |
ืืื ืืื. ืืขื ื. ืื. | ืึฐืึธื ืึทืึทื ืึทืขึฒื ืึผ ืึดื | โand all my brothers will testify for meโ |
ืืงืฆืจื ืืชื | ืึทืงึผึนืฆึฐืจึดืื ืึดืชึผึดื | โwho harvested with meโ |
ืืื. [ื]ืฉ[ืืฉ | ืึผึฐืึนื [ืึท]ืฉืึผึถ[ืึถืฉื | โin the heat of the sunโ |
ืืื. ืืขื ื. ืื ืืื | ืึทืึทื ืึทืขึฒื ืึผ ืึดื ืึธืึตื | โmy brothers will testify for me. Amen.โ |
ื ืงืชื. ืื[ืฉื | ื ึดืงึผึตืชึดื ืึตืึธ[ืฉืึธื | โI am innocent from any guiltโ |
ืืขืช ืืฉื ื ื ืืช] ืืืื | ืึฐืขึทืชึผึธ ืึธืฉืึตื ื ึธื ืึถืช] ืึผึดืึฐืึผึดื | โand now, let him return my garment!โ |
ืืืืื. ืืฉืจ | ืึทืึฒืึทืึผึตื ืึทืฉืึผึทืจ | โAnd I call out to the commanderโ |
ืืืฉ[ื ืืช ืืื] ืขื[ืื | ืึฐืึธืฉืึด[ื ืึถืช ืึผึถืึถื] ืขึทืึฐ[ืึผึฐืึธ | โto return the garment of your servantโ |
ืืชืช]ื ืืื. ืจื[ืื | ืึฐืชึดืชึผึต]ื ืึตืื ืจึทืึฒ[ืึดื | โand grant him mercyโ |
ืืืฉ]ืืช ืืช [ืืื ืข]ืืื | ืึทืึฒืฉืึต]ืึนืชึธ ืึถืช [ืึผึถืึถื ืขึท]ืึฐืึผึฐืึธ | โand return the garment of your servantโ |
ืืื ืชืืื ื | ืึฐืึนื ืชึผึทืึผึดืึถื ึผืึผ | โand do not send him away!โ |
Commentary
ืืื ื
Note that in the Tiberian vocalisation tradition of Biblical Hebrew, the consonantal text ืืื ื is construed as plural ืึฒืึนื ึธื when it refers to God but as singular ืึฒืึนื ึดื when it means โmy lord; my masterโ and refers to a human. Such a distinction, however, likely did not apply in the First Temple periodโthis may still have been the case at the time of this inscription. All masters, human and divine, could be referred to in the plural as /สadoหniหm/ โmasterโ or /สadoหnajj/ โmy masterโ with the 1CS suffix added.
In the Second Temple period, however, after the Jews began to pronounce the tetragrammaton (ืืืื) as ืึฒืึนื ึธื (instead of something like [jahหweห]), this began to change. At that point, referring to a human master as ืึฒืึนื ึทื โmy masterโ might have sounded too much like you were calling the human master by the name of God. As a result, what would have been a plural form with a 1CS suffix in an earlier period came to be pronounced as a singular form with a 1CS suffix: i.e., ืึฒืึนื ึทื โ ืึฒืึนื ึดื. This maintained a clear distinction between human masters and the divine name.
This is a consistent trend that can be found in the Tiberian vocalisation of the Hebrew Bible. Note, for example, that when Abraham is talking to God in Genesis 18, he refers to God as ืึฒืึนื ึธื โmy lord.PLโ: e.g., โืึดื ึตึผืึพื ึธึคื ืืึนืึทึืึฐืชึดึผืึ ืึฐืึทืึตึผึฃืจ ืึถืึพืึฒืึนื ึธึื ืึฐืึธื ึนืึดึื ืขึธืคึธึฅืจ ืึธืึตึฝืคึถืจื โlook now, I have undertaken to speak to my lord while I am but dust and ashesโ (Gen. 18.27). In the same chapter, however, when Sarah refers to Abraham her husband as โmy lordโ, she refers to him as ืึฒืึนื ึดื โmy lord.SGโ: e.g., โืึทืึฒืจึตึคื ืึฐืึนืชึดืึ ืึธึฝืึฐืชึธืึพืึดึผึฃื ืขึถืึฐื ึธึื ืึทึฝืืึนื ึดึื ืึธืงึตึฝืื โafter I am worn out, should I have pleasure, when my lord is old?โ (Gen. 18.12).
However, when possessive suffixes other than the 1CS suffix are added (โyour masterโ, โhis masterโ, etc.), the noun is still construed as a plural, even for human masters: e.g., ืึดึผืึพืึธืึ ืึทืึทึฃื ืึธืขึธึื ืึฐืึทืฉึฐืืึดึืืช ืึถืชึพืึทืึถึผึฅืึถืึฐ ืึฒืึนื ึถึฝืืึธื โfor one of the people came to destroy the king, your masterโ (1 Sam. 26.15); โืึฒืฉึถืืจึฉ ืฉึฐืืึธืึจืึน ืึถึฝืึถืึฐึพืึทืฉึผืึคืึผืจ ื ืึฒืึนื ึธืืึ โwhom his master, the king of Assyria, has sentโ (2 Kgs. 19.4). There are two potentialโbut not mutually exclusiveโreasons for the maintenance of the plural in such forms. For one, it is only the form with the 1CS suffix that sounds like the standard pronunciation of the tetragrammaton in the Second Temple period and after. The other reason is that in all of these other cases the yod of the plural is preserved in the consonantal text, so it could not be vocalised as anything but a plural.
All of this is simply to say, though, that readers of this 7th c. BCE inscription might still have maintained the more archaic pronunciation of the plural /สadoหnajj/ for a human master.
ืืฉืจ
Note that the form ืืฉืจ โthe commanderโ is definite. This is also the case with the vocative in a direct address: e.g., ืึผึธืึธึฅืจ ืึดึื ืึตืึถึืืึธ ืึทืฉืึผึธึืจ โI have a word for you, O commanderโ (2 Kgs. 9.5).
ืขืืื ืงืฆืจ ืืื ืขืืื
The subject ืขืืื โyour servantโ is clause-initial but then the author sort of backtracks into the more idiomatic way of introducing his narrative with a clause-final subject: ืงึนืฆึตืจ ืึธืึธื ืขึทืึฐืึผึฐืึธ โso your servant would harvestโ. All together, one might render ืขืืื ืงืฆืจ ืืื ืขืืื as โyour servantโso your servant would harvestโ. This syntactic construction may be regarded as a Hanging Topic Left Dislocation. Although some scholars render this expression as a sort of circumstantial clause โyour servant was harvesting…โ (Ahฬฃituv 2008, 159), it is probably more like a past habitual โyour servant would harvest (as his normal work routine)โ. It is providing the necessary background to what is about to follow. This is supported by a similar construction in the Hebrew Bible: โืึทืึผึนึคืืึถืจ ืึผึธืึดืึ ืึถืึพืฉืึธืึืึผื ืจึนืขึถึจื ืึธืึธึงื ืขึทืึฐืึผึฐืึธึ ืึฐืึธืึดึืื ืึผึทืฆึผึนึืื ืึผืึธึคื ืึธึฝืึฒืจึดืึ ืึฐืึถืชึพืึทืึผึืึนื ืึฐื ึธืฉืึธึฅื ืฉืึถึื ืึตืึธืขึตึฝืึถืจื โand David said to Saul, โYour servant would watch the flocks for his father, and the lion and the bear would come and take a sheep from the herd.โโ (1 Sam. 17.34).
ืืืฆืจ ืืกื
Note that the final patahฬฃ in the construct form ืึฒืฆึทืจ in the Tiberian tradition is likely due to lowering in the environment of the resh. The absolute form ืึธืฆึตืจ provides more insight into the historical form */ฤงaแนฃir/, which probably obtained in both absolute and construct states in this early period.
ืืืงืฆืจ
Before the Second Temple period, there was likely no morphological distinction between vav + yiqแนญol and vayyiqแนญol (also known as the vav consecutive) in a form like this. There would have been no gemination of the prefix consonant at this early period (see Kantor 2020). Therefore, the form is to be vocalised as */wa-jiqหแนฃur/. One might consider a penultimate stress, but we follow here either Suchard who suggests a stress shift *vฬCCvC โ *vCCvฬC s (Suchard 2020, 93) or the idea that analogy to the long/regular yiqแนญol form might have brought this about. Reconstructing stress at this ancient period, however, can be a difficult task and is not given to certainty.
ืืืื
The sequence ืืืื has generally been interpreted as coming from the root ืืืดื โto finish; to completeโ or from the root ืืืดื/ืืืดื โto measure; to containโ. If it is from the former, the vocalisation would be */wa-หjikall/ โand finishedโ in the piสฟสฟel/piสฟสฟal binyan. If it is from the latter, the vocalisation would be */wa-หjakul/ (or */wa-หjakil/) โand measuredโ in the qal binyan. On one hand, the root ืืืดื โto finishโ is more commonly attested in the Bible in the context of ืงืฆืืจ โharvestโ: e.g., โืขึทึฃื ืึดืึพืึผึดืึผึืึผ ืึตึฅืช ืึผึธืึพืึทืงึผึธืฆึดึืืจ ืึฒืฉืึถืจึพืึดึฝืื โuntil they have finished all the harvest that is mineโ (Ruth 2.21). The root ืืืดื is not attested at all in the context of ืงืฆืืจ โharvestโ in the Bible. On the other hand, the spelling ืื [ืข]ืืื ืืช ืงืฆืจ might recommend the root ืืืดื/ืืืดื, since there is no final heh mater as would be expected for the word ืึผึดืึผึธื โfinishedโ (Ahฬฃituv 2008, 161). And yet, even later in this same sentence a final heh mater appears to be absent from ืงืฆืจ = */qaแนฃiหru(h)/. Ahฬฃituvโs statement that โthe root ืืื in Piสฟel … is precluded by the absence of a mater lectionis in the form ืืโ seems a bit too certain. Nevertheless, his claim that the argument is about whether the plaintiff has โfulfilled his quota or notโ is a good point (Ahฬฃituv 2008, 161). Nevertheless, either option seems tenable to me. โCompletingโ and โstoringโ a harvest is sensible. โMeasuringโ and โstoringโ a harvest is also possible. We have gone with the former because it has a biblical parallel.
ืืืกื
The sequence ืืืกื may reflect either the CONJ vav + qaแนญal (โ ืึฐืึธืกึทื) or vav + the infinitive absolute (โ ืึฐืึธืกึนื). We have opted for the infinitive absolute here (i.e., */wa-สaหsoหm/), partly due to the fact that vav + yiqแนญol is used frequently in this letter to indicate narrative past actions. Nevertheless, the CONJ vav + qaแนญal interpretation is possible.
ืืืื
The phrase ืืืื has been compared (Ahฬฃituv 2008, 161) to certain phrases involving past habitual (or iterative) action in the Hebrew Bible: e.g., ืึฐืขึธืึธืึฉ ืึธืึดึจืืฉื ืึทืึคืึผื ืึตึฝืขึดืืจืึนึ ืึดืึผึธืึดึฃืื ื ืึธืึดึืืึธื ืึฐืึดึฝืฉืึฐืชึผึทืึฒืึนึงืช ืึฐืึดืึฐืึผึนึืึท ืึทืืืึธึฅื ืฆึฐืึธืึืึนืช ืึผึฐืฉืึดืึนึื โand that man would go up from his city year by year to worship and to make sacrifices to YHWH of Hosts at Shilohโ (1 Sam. 1.3); ืึฐืึธืึดึื ืึฐื ึทืึผึตึฅื ืึผึฐืึธืึืึน ืึผึฐืึฃืึนื ื ืึผึฐืึืึนื โand David would play the lyre with his hand day by dayโ (1 Sam. 18.10). We have rendered it as indefinite (*/ka-jaหmiหm/) due to the greater tendency for unique and generic nouns to undergo definiteness following the inseparable prepositions in some later traditions of Hebrew (see Bekins and Kantor, forthcoming).
ืืคื ื ืฉืืช
A similar phrase is found in the Hebrew Bible, but with the definite article: ืึดืคึฐื ึตึฃื ืึทืฉืึผึทืึผึธึืช โbefore the Sabbathโ (Neh. 13.19). The form without the definite article in the inscription may be more archaic, given the late nature of Nehemiah. There is also a tendency for definiteness to increase in generic and unique nouns in later traditions of Hebrew (see Bekins and Kantor, forthcoming).
ืืืฉืจ
The original pronunciation of the word ืึฒืฉึถืืจ is debatable. On one hand, it likely comes from an earlier Semitic nominal form */สaฮธaru/ (for the etymology of ืฉึถื and ืึฒืฉึถืืจ, see Huehnergard 2006). However, the Greek transcriptions of Hebrew in the Secunda write this word as ฮตฯฮตฯ, the Latin transcriptions of Hebrew in Jerome write it as eser, and the Samaritan Hebrew reading tradition has an initial [eห] vowel in [หสeหสษr]. This suggests that it may have been a segholate (i.e., *qiแนญl pattern) noun at an early stage of Hebrew, something like */สiสr/. Although this is not commonly cited as a likely reconstruction of this word, Secunda scholars like myself and Yuditsky (2017, 217) support it. Its lack of mention in wider scholarship may be due to lack of familiarity with the Greek and Latin transcriptions of Hebrew and the Samaritan tradition. With the prefix */ka-/, then, the word would be */ka-สiสr/.
ืื
Ahฬฃituv (2008, 161) suggests that the absence of a heh mater in this word means that it has to be from the root ืืืดื/ืืืดื (i.e., ืึผึธื โmeasuredโ) rather than ืืืดื (i.e., ืึผึดืึผึธื โfinishedโ). However, the word ืงืฆืจ elsewhere in this same clause (see below) is without a heh mater but must have a vowel at the end of it. In the Hebrew Bible, the verb ืึผึดืึผึธื โfinishedโ can be associated with ืงึธืฆึดืืจ โharvestโ: e.g., โืขึทึฃื ืึดืึพืึผึดืึผึืึผ ืึตึฅืช ืึผึธืึพืึทืงึผึธืฆึดึืืจ ืึฒืฉืึถืจึพืึดึฝืื โuntil they have finished all the harvest that is mineโ (Ruth 2.21). On the other hand, the point that a main theme in the inscription is whether or not the plaintiff fulfilled his quota would recommend ืึผึธื โmeasuredโ. On the other hand, one might also suggest that the dispute was about whether or not he โfinishedโ his work, which does not necessarily imply that a quota be mentioned in the complaint. Either interpretation is thus possible. We opt for the root ืืืดื.
One other point to be made in favor of the root ืืืดื concerns the flow of the text and the nature of the pairing of the particle ืืืฉืจ โwhenโ with the verb ืื or ืืืช. While ืืืฉืจ ืืื … ืืืกื could conceivably be taken as โwhen measured … and storedโ, it would seem odd to render the phrase ืืืฉืจ ืืืช … ืืงื later in the inscription as โwhen I had measured … he tookโ. It seems more plausible to render โwhen I had finished … he tookโ.
ืืช ืงืฆืจ
The fact that the noun ืงืฆืจ is preceded by the direct object marker ืืช would seem to imply that it should be pronounced with a 3MS possessive suffix: i.e., */qaแนฃiหru(h)/ or */qaแนฃiหหroห/ โhis harvestโ. This serves to suppor the claim that the absence of a heh mater in the verbal form ืื is not conclusive for the root ืืืดื/ืืืดื over against ืืืดื.
ืืืื … ืืืงื
In light of the comments above regarding the vayyiqแนญol form, these are to be vocalised without gemination in the prefix: i.e., */wa-หjabo(ห)(ส)/ and */wa-jiqหqaฤง/ or */wa-jiqหqiฤง/. While the Tiberian tradition has a final patahฬฃ in the form ืึทืึผึดืงึผึทื, there may be reason for thinking earlier forms of Hebrew might have had an */e/ or */i/ theme vowel. It has been suggested that the morphophonological shape of ืึดืงึผึทื was influenced in part by that of ืึดืชึผึตื, which does exhibit an */e/ or */i/ theme vowel. Note also the fact that at an earlier stage of Hebrew, /ฤง/ did not necessarily bring about the same lowering. The Secunda renders ืึฐืึธืงึทึฅืึทืช โand to acceptโ (Mal. 2.13) as ฮฟฯ ฮปฮฑฮบฮตฮธ.
ืืืช
Assuming we are continuing with a piสฟสฟel/piสฟสฟal verb from the root ืืืดื, we may reconstruct the pronunciation of this verb as */killiหtiห/ or perhaps */killiหt/ as a morphological biform without a final */iห/ vowel. Note that other forms below (ืงืฆืจื and ื ืงืชื) make use of a final yod mater in such contexts. It is possible that the sequence ืืืช ืืช */killiหtiห สit/ contracted to *[killiหtit] in quick speech and thus the verb was pronounced as if it terminated with /-t/. Note also that in the Hebrew Bible dissimilation in the final vowel of the stem before the 1CS ending is common: e.g., ืฆึดืึผึตืืชึดื โI commandedโ alongside ืฆึดืึผึดืืชึดื (see Rubin 2001). If this phenomenon already obtained in the First Temple period, then we might also suggest */killeหtiห/ as a possibility.
ืงืฆืจื
Note the use of a final yod mater for the long /iห/ vowel of the 1CS suffix in */qaแนฃiหriห/. It does not imply a consonantal realization.
ืื ืืื
The phrase ืึถื ืึธืึดืื is also attested in the Hebrew Bible: e.g., โืึฒืึฝืึนืึพืึถึจื ืึธืึดึื ืขึถึฃืึถื ื ืฉืึธืึฃืึผื ืึถึฝืึถืึฐึพืึดืฉืึฐืจึธืึตึื ืึฒืฉืึถึจืจ ืึธืึธึคื ืึดืชึผึดืึ ืึถึคื ืึธืึดืืึ ืืึนึพืึถึฃื ืฉืึธื ึดึืื ืึฐืึนึฝืึพืึธืฆึธึคืืชึดื ืืึนึ ืึฐืึืึผืึธื ืึดืึผึฅืึนื ื ึธืคึฐืึืึน ืขึทืึพืึทืึผึฅืึนื ืึทืึผึถึฝืื โis this not David, the servant of Saul, king of Israel, who was with me already days or years and I did not find in him fault from the day of his fall until this dayโ (1 Sam. 29.3). The expression can also be used with an adjective modifier for ืึธืึดืื: e.g., โืึนึฝืึพืขึฒืึทืึฐืชึผึถึฃื ืึถืชึพืึฒืึตืืึถึื ืึถึื ืึธืึดึฃืื ืจึทืึผึดึืื ืขึทึื ืึทืึผึฃืึนื ืึทืึผึถึื โyou have not forsaken your brothers for many days now all the way until this very dayโ (Josh. 22.3); โืึฐืึทืึพืชึผึธืกึืึผืึดืึ ืฉืึถึืึถื ืึฐืึธืึดึืืช ืึผึฐืึดืฉืึผึธึื ืึถึื ืึธืึดึฃืื ืจึทืึผึดึืื ืึดืชึฐืึทืึผึถึืึถืช ืขึทืึพืึตึฝืชื โand do not anoint with oil, but be as a woman who now for many days has been mourning over a dead oneโ (2 Sam. 14.2). Idiomatically, the phrase ืึถื ืึธืึดืื seems to mean something like โalready for daysโ which is extended to indicate โas alwaysโ.
ืืื
From other Semitic languages like Arabic (ุฃุฎ สaฯ โbrotherโ), we know that the ื in the word ืื โbrotherโ goes back to /ฯ/ rather than /ฤง/. At the time of this inscription, these sounds had not yet merged. Note also that in the plural form, the /ฯ/ consonant was probably doubled. This is likely in light of the behavior of certain suffixed forms in Tiberian Hebrew, like ืึถืึธืื โhis brothersโ. Therefore, we have vocalised ืืื as */สaฯฯajj/.
ืืขื ื
Transcriptions from the Secunda suggest that at an earlier stage of Hebrew, not all I-สฟ roots had an /a/ prefix vowel in the yiqแนญol form: cf. ืชึผึทึฝืขึฒืฉืึืึผ โyou doโ (Mal. 2.13) as ฮธฮตฯฮฟฯ . There are thus two ways to look at Tiberian ืึทืขึฒื ืึผ. The initial patahฬฃ is either a preservation of the original *yaqแนญul pattern or it represents lowering in the environment of /ส/. Given the fact that lowering is avoided in forms like ืึดืึฐืึถื and ืึดืึฐืึถื (see Khan 2018), this suggests that perhaps at an earlier stage of Hebrew the prefix vowel was generally */i/.
ืืื
The form ืืื = */สaหmin/ was originally a 3MS qaแนญal verb expressing a wish: i.e., โmay it be true!โ or โmay it be faithful!โ. Eventually, it developed into a liturgical or religious term. It is highly significant, though, that we have one of the few non-religious attestations of this word in this ancient letter. This perhaps provides some insight into the development of ืืื as a religious term.
ื ืงืชื
This is a nifสฟal form of the root ื ืงืดื. In light of the possible dissimilation of the final vowel of the stem from the vowel of the 1CS (see Rubin 2001), the form could be pronounced as */niqqiหtiห/ or */niqqeหtiห/.
[ืืขืช ืืฉื ื ื ืืช]
Different suggestions have been put forward for filling in this missing portion. According to Ahฬฃituv (2008, 159โ160), the empty space may be filled in with a jussive command. Alternatively, one might suggest a direct address via an imperative form.
ืืืืื ืืฉืจ
The root ืืืดื normally means โto be fullโ or โto fillโ, but here it must mean something like โcall outโ or some other verb of speech. Ahฬฃituv (2008, 160, 163) renders ืืืืื as โand I call outโ, comparing the following biblical example: ืงึดืจึฐืึคืึผ ืึทืึฐืืึผึ ืึฐืึดืึฐืจึืึผ โcry out and say!โ (Jer. 4.5). He also considers the alternative of โI will recompenseโ, citing the following example: ืึทืึฐืึทืึฐืึฃืึผื ืึทืึผึถึืึถืึฐ โand they gave them to the king in fullโ (1 Sam. 18.27). But, as Ahฬฃituv points out, it seems unlikely that the author would be seeking to pay or bribe the official here. Calling out seems more likely.
Other scholars have suggested dividing the words differently (e.g., Hackett), so that the sequence reads ืืื ืื โand if notโ. If this is the case, then we could understand the wider context as: โlet him return my garment! … but if not … itโs on the commander to return my garment!โ. This would also be a reasonable reading.
ืืชืช]ื
The first few letters of this word are restored. However, the pairing of ื ึธืชึทื โto giveโ and ืจึทืึฒืึดืื โcompassionโ is attested in the Bible: โืึฐืึตึฃื ืฉืึทืึผึทึื ืึดืชึผึตึจื ืึธืึถึคื ืจึทืึฒืึดืืึ โand may El Shadday grant you compassion!โ (Gen. 43.14); โืึฐื ึธึฝืชึทืึพืึฐืึธึค ืจึทืึฒืึดืืึ โand show you compassionโ (Deut. 13.18); โืึฐืึถืชึผึตึฅื ืึธืึถึื ืจึทืึฒืึดึืื โand I will grant you compassionโ (Jer. 42.12).
ืจื[ืื
In the Tiberian tradition, the word ืจึทืึฒืึดืื โcompassionโ exhibits an irregular plural for a segholate noun. It appears to be formed off the singular base rather than with the typical a-insertion in the plural of segholate nouns: i.e., */raฤงm/ โ */raฤงmiหm/, but cf. */malk/ โkingโ โ */malakiหm/ โkingsโ. Though uncommon, there are other such forms: e.g., ืฉืึดืงึฐืึดึฃืื โsycamoresโ (Isa. 9.9); ืคึผึดืฉืึฐืชึผึดึฝืืื โlinenโ (Lev. 13.47) (see Fox 2003, 108). It is possible that this irregular plural developed to distinguish it from a hypothesized plural ืจึฐืึธืึดืื โwombsโ.
ืืืฉ]ืืช
The lack of a final heh mater may suggest that ืืืฉ]ืืช exhibits the 2MS morphological biform with just a final /-t/: i.e., */hiสbitt/. Note that a similar form is attested in the Secunda transcriptions of Hebrew: ืึดืฉืึฐืึผึทึฅืชึผึธ โyou have made ceaseโ (Ps. 89.45) as ฮตฯฮฒฮตฮธ.
ืืื ืชืืื ื
There is scholarly debate about the correct reading of the final word. Some (e.g., Ahฬฃituv 2008, 159) suggest ืืื ืชืืืื ื โand do not confound me!โ from the root ืืืดื. Others (e.g., Frank Moore Cross) suggest the reading ืืื ืชืืื ื โand do not drive him awayโ from the root ื ืืดื with a 3MS object suffix as a reference to the servant (i.e., the author of the inscription) in the third person.
Bibliography:
Aแธฅituv, Shmuel. 2008. Echoes From the Past: Hebrew and Cognate Inscriptions From the Biblical Period. Jerusalem: Carta. Pages 156โ164.
Bekins, Peter, and Benjamin Kantor. forthcoming. โThe History of the Vocalization of the Definite Article with Inseparable Prepositions in Tiberian Hebrew.โ
Dobbs-Allsopp, F. W. 1994. โThe Genre of the Meแนฃad แธคashavyahu Ostracon.โ Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 295: 49โ55.
Fox, Joshua. 2003. Semitic Noun Patterns. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
Huehnergard, John. 2015. โBiblical Hebrew Nominal Patterns.โ In Epigraphy, Philology, and the Hebrew Bible: Methodological Perspectives on Philological and Comparative Study of the Hebrew Bible in Honor of Jo Ann Hackett, edited by Jeremy M. Hutton, and Aaron D. Rubin, 25โ64. Atlanta: SBL Press.
Kantor, Benjamin. 2020. โThe Development of the Hebrew wayyiqแนญol (โwaw Consecutiveโ) Verbal Form in Light of Greek and Latin Transcriptions of Hebrew.โ In Studies in Semitic Vocalisation and Reading Traditions, edited by Geoffrey Khan, and Aaron Hornkohl, 55โ132. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers.
โโ. forthcoming. ฯแฝธ แผฮฒฯฮฑฯฮบฯฮฝ | TO HEBRAIKON: A Critical Edition of the Second Column (Secunda) of Origenโs Hexapla. Leuven: Peeters.
Khan, Geoffrey. 2018. โOrthoepy in the Tiberian Reading Tradition of the Hebrew Bible and Its Historical Roots in the Second Temple Period.โ Vetus Testamentum 68: (3): 378โ401.
Lambdin, Thomas O., and John Huehnergard. 2000. The Historical Grammar of Classical Hebrew. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University.
Naveh, Joseph. 1960. โA Hebrew Letter from the Seventh Century B.C.โ Israel Exploration Journal 10, no. 3: 129โ139.
โโ. 1964. โSome Notes on the Reading of the Mesad Hashavyahu Letter.โ Israel Exploration Journal 14: 158โ159.
Pardee, Dennis. 1978. โThe Juridicial Plea from Mesad Hashavyahu (Yavneh-Yam): A New Philological Study.โ Maarav 1: 33โ66.
Rubin, Aaron D. 2001. โA Note on the Conjugation of Lamed-He Verbs in the Derived Patterns.โ Zeitschrift fรผr Althebraistik 14: (1): 34โ41.
Smelik, Klaas A. D. 1992. โThe Literary Structure of the Yavneh-Yam Ostracon.โ Israel Exploration Journal 42, no. 1/2: 55โ61.
Suchard, Benjamin D. 2020. The Development of the Biblical Hebrew vowels: Including a Concise Historical Morphology. Leiden: Brill.
I must also thank Jo Ann Hackett, who trained me in Northwest Semitic Epigraphy. Of course, any errors in the above are my own.
Responses