IamJoseph,

Please excuse brievity.

Moorehouse (1953) refers to the Ugaritic phonic-alphabet having the vowels i, e, o and u. [no a] Albeit the characters appear visually as to be cuniform [say like the Persians of that time], Morehouse believes these to spoken as vowels [c. 1200 - 1400 BCE.]. There were also Pheonician signs for the consonants, b an g, which Moorehouse calls, "innovative".

There seems to have been vowel "phonograms" [new word for me] bridging cuniform and more modern vowels.

Mention is also made by Moorehose of "aleph"*, in the early Northern Semite, wherein aleph is a consonant.

* Aleph, Hebrew; Alaph, Pheonician? If the Pheonicians didn't have an "a" and aleph & aleph were originally consonsants, this might point to the Hebrews, inventing, "a".

Recognize the source is fifty years plus old and there will have further developments.

Regards.

I am aware the general theory is phoenecian is an alphabetical writing predating the hebrew, and thus it had vowels.

The anomoly is the phonecian did not possess the 'V' alphabet, and we have no equivalent phonecian books, as with the hebrew. Considering that phonecia was an older and mightier nation than Israel, and one not subject to exiles and dispersians - I cannot rationalise this anamoly. where are all the phonecian alphabetical books - this peoples prevail a 1000 years after israel emerged: what happened?

IamJoseph,

"There are 100s of pheonecien bits of alphabetical writings, not historical, but trade and burual reciepts, with no dates on the epitaphs - and no phonecian alphabetical 'books' in existence."

The book, as a condex, would have been a much a later development. Scrolls and tablets I suspect were meant to be read from beginning to end and not for comparison, as say, a Christian might compare the NT and OT or apocalyptic texts. I guess, today, researchers do review bi/multi lingual tablets, like the Rosetta Stone, but that is different.

Yes, one would have expected the Pheonicians to have beaten the Hebrews on the alphabet. As an aside, it amazes me that the telescope was developed hundreds of years after lenses.

The Hebrews were a very accomplished people. Of the Humankind, Schodinger, leveraging Adious Huxley, a bit, stated that in the context on everyday humans leaning on technology, it could have a counter productive result, in developmental terms, because folks are not challenged.

The Hebrews were a maligned and poorly treated people, which must have at once been both appalling and challenging, to them. Perhaps, the fertile field for Huxley's, Alpha's [ahem :-)]. I mean constaintly being mistreated; one must have needed one's wits razor shape.

Will need to check-up a little more on our Pheneonian friends.

With ancient alphabets it is interesting that there are curves in the script, something that masons and artians avoid in guild alphabets

"The book, as a condex, would have been a much a later development. Scrolls and tablets I suspect were meant to be read from beginning to end and not for comparison, as say, a Christian might compare the NT and OT or apocalyptic texts. I guess, today, researchers do review bi/multi lingual tablets, like the Rosetta Stone, but that is different."

In any scenario taken, the phonecians would at least have to possess equivalently advanced writings as the hebrew, if they predated it. So it remains an anomoly, besides that the hebrew introduced the 'V' and another sound, and claims in its writings to have written the Torah in the desert, prior to their meeting a peoples called phonecians [Babylonion]. The phonecians were still around a 1000 years after israel - yet they have not a single alphabetical book - it is unusual, indicating an error of the allocated datings.

IamJoseph.

I am following your points, I think, including the wide time-line spread of the Pheonicans. Very interesting.

I will add "V" to my study list with along with the Pheonicians.

Yes, dating is a problem. I guess one would need to synchronise the the Gezer Calendar with the Gegorian. And as we know both have discovered even the birth of Jesus doesn't work-out: I reckon 7 BCE, based on astronomical events recorded, the significance of 4,000 [60 CE, circa the fall of the Second Temple] on the Jewish continuous, visa-a-vis the Roman, the relations of the Herods/Annas with Julius/Augustus respectively for JC to have a run for the House of David.

Back to the topic of the "Book". The Word, Book, according to Moorehouse is from Byblos, a kind of papyrus roll from a city of the same name. Of the earliest: "It consists of five lines and relates to the King Shaphaṭbaal; it may be as old as the seventeenth century B.C. (but the date is doubtful).":. The scroll is discribed as North Semitic, from Byblos, the place, in Northern Syria. We are not a lone when it comes to dates being problematic

"We are not a lone when it comes to dates being problematic"

The dates enigma spans many scenarios pre-gregorian hisory. The NT & Quran have serious problems with historical datings vis avis each other, and between the quran and the OT.

What is interesting, notithstanding that some of the lifespan periods for Genesis figures [which go upto 900 years], is that the datings thread in the OT is absolutely exacting in terms of its own narratives - with no evdence which disputes it. Admittedly, there is no historical writings which nominate dates, names and places as does the OT. What I am referring to here, and perhaps you or anyone else can input, is the amazing accuracy of the OT, which records 100s of 1000s of numbers in its narratives of datings. I cannot even imagine a super PC performing such a task today, and this is a mystery considering its space-time. Let me give one example here.

There is a verse in the 10 commandments portion, which says:

'REMEMBER *THIS* DAY AS THE SABBATH..ETC' [4th C]

The term 'THIS' is because that day was in fact a sabbath [Saturday] - and if all the life-spans of all figureheads and their numerous geneologies, together with all the laws relating to rememberences religious festivals - if all this is taken into account, and the OT calendar is measured - indeed it is mathematically condusive to 'This day' being a saturday. Here, we are talking about a recorded, dated period of some 2,500 years [Moses lived 3,500 years ago].

How is this possible? This is compounded by the fact every name in the OT is scientifically authentic of its space time. I have not seen such a phenomenon anywhere.