Peter T. Daniels wrote:

>Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>
>
>>Finally dawned on me that this group might be interested in seeing this...
>>
>>I just got a copy of a Samaritan Pentateuch: that is, the Samaritan
>>version of the books, printed in Samaritan script. The Samaritans use a
>>version of the paleo-Hebrew script, whereas Jewish Hebrew (as used in
>>Modern Hebrew, and Jewish Hebrew writing since the Dead Sea Scrolls and
>>before) in is an Aramaic alphabet. I've uploaded a scan of the first
>>page to the qalam files site (called SPscan_small.png). Note that
>>spaces are not used to separate words (instead they're used to line
>>things up in pretty columns), they're separated by dots (in the absence
>>of other punctuation). This book is also fully pointed(!) in the
>>Samaritan style of pointing (somewhat adapted and expanded, according to
>>the end-notes), and punctuated with the traditional
>>punctuation/accents.
>>
>>
>
>After all the rigmamarole of accessing the "Files" department of the
>qalam site, the files don't seem to be in any order, and clicking on the
>link for this image, it decided to download a 719 kB "small" file.
>
>No, thanks.
>
>

You should have seen it before I scaled it down. The "small" is because
the full-size scan (at 600 dpi) is 17 MB. I could make a pure
black-and-white (as opposed to greyscale) version, which would be smaller.

>I've never heard of Samaritan being pointed. Either Hebrew or Aramaic.
>Let alone with "traditional" punctuation/accents -- since the basic
>theology of the Samaritans is that there is no Scripture but the Torah,
>and it is preserved unaltered over the millennia.
>
>

I've been reading up on this myself. Certainly the "pointing" of
Samaritan has nowhere near the stability or prominence that Tiberian
pointing of Hebrew has (and we're agreed that even that has very little
prominence). But it has been going on for a while, if inconsistently,
and certainly exists now. Ze'ev Ben-Hayyim, in his book "The Grammar of
Samaritan Hebrew" discusses the "usual pointing signs found in Samaritan
manuscripts", and these are mentioned in "Samaritan grammatical works,
the oldest of which is certainly not earlier than the tenth century."
So they are presumably of *some* decent age, at least a few centuries
(Jewish Hebrew pointing isn't that much older). Similarly, the
punctuation marks (or accents?) are also found described in the writings
of Tabia b. Darta, who lived in the tenth century (according to
Ben-Hayyim; ben-Darta's writings are quoted in the Pentateuch I have).
Avraham Tal also indicated familiarity with the signs, when we contacted
him, and I think (but I'm not sure) that Alan D. Crown mentions them as
well -- and these are among the top Samaritan researchers of the 20th
century. To say nothing of Benyamim Tsedaka (no, I didn't misspell his
name), a prominent Samaritan, editor of the A.B. the Samaritan
Newsletter and envoy of the High Priest, with whom I discussed the
vocalization system in detail. So I think I can safely say I'm not
making this up.

Now, that said, the pointing does not, it is true, enjoy even so much
limited prominence as Tiberian pointing does in Jewish Hebrew. Although
the Pentateuch I have is fully pointed, even more exactingly than usual
(e.g. vowel-length is also distinguished), according to Ben-Hayyim the
signs are not used consistently from manuscript to manuscript, and even
within the same manuscript they are not used consistently, so far as can
be determined.

Quoth Ben-Hayyim:

> To this day, I know of no SP [Samaritan Pentateuch] produced by the
> Samaritans for their own use which contains a systematic, thorough
> indication of the vowel sounds. While it is true that as far back as
> the Middle Ages, the Samaritans invented vowel signs, their use,
> however, never departed from the limited scope of teaching children or
> preventing errors in pronouncing words in which the spelling allows
> for more than one pronunciation. Even in this very limited realm, no
> symbol maintains a uniform shape, and there is no one clear method of
> indicating the vowels.

So the signs are not used consistently or perfectly, and certainly not
in general, but they do exist and have done so for some time. N.B. the
SP I have in hand was published around the same time that Ben-Hayyim's
book was, so he may not have been aware of it. And in any case, it is
definitely "cleaned-up" for pedagogic purposes, with everything, even
the Modern-Hebrew end-matter discussing the pointing and the process of
printing the text, pointed according to (presumably back-fitted)
Samaritan pronunciation. It even uses at least one symbol which the
publishers *state* was invented by them, since the usual pointing system
doesn't distinguish /o/ from /u/ (since they generally alternate with
/o/ being on short syllables and /u/ on longer ones, but the editors of
this book wanted to be more explicit). This book also may or may not be
considered "for their own use," though I think that's at least part of
the motivation for it.

So, no, the pointing has nowhere near the importance or tradition of
Tiberian pointing, but there *IS* a Samaritan tradition of pointing and
punctuation that dates back probably about 1000 years.

~mark