HEBREW Character. There are two kinds of Hebrew characters: the ancient, called also the square; and the modern, or rabbinical character.
1. The square Hebrew takes its denomination from the figure of its characters, which stand more square, and have their angles more exact and precise than the other. This character is used in the text of Holy Scripture, and their other principal and most important writings. When both this and the rabbinical character are used in the same work, the former is for the text, or the fundamental part; and the latter for the accessory part, as the gloss, notes, commentaries, &c.
The best and most beautiful characters of this kind, are those copied from the characters in the Spanish manuscripts; next, those from the Italian manuscripts; then those from the French; and, lastly, those of the Germans, whose characters are much the same, with respect to the other genuine square Hebrew characters, that the Gothic or Dutch characters are with respect to the Roman.
Several authors contend, that the square character is not the real ancient Hebrew character, written from the beginning of the language, to the time of the Babylonish captivity; but that it is the Assyrian or Chaldee character, which the Jews assumed, and accustomed themselves to, during the captivity, and retained afterwards. They say, that the Jews, during their captivity, had quite disused their ancient character; so that Ezra found it necessary to have the sacred books transcribed into the Chaldee square character. These authors add, that what we call the Samaritan character, is the genuine ancient Hebrew. Of this opinion are Scaliger, Bochart, Casaubon, Vossius, Grotius, Walton, Capellus, &c. and among the ancients Jerome and Eusebius. On this side it is urged, that the present characters are called Assyrian by the ancient Jewish writers of the Talmud, and therefore must have been brought from Assyria: but to this argument it is replied, that there were two sorts of characters anciently in use, viz. the sacred or present square character, and the profane or civil, which we call Samaritan; and that the sacred is called Assyrian, because it first began in Assyria to come into common use. It is farther alleged,
Hebrew. leged, that the Chaldee letters, which the Jews now use, were unknown to the ancient Jews before the captivity, from Dan. i. 4. Moreover, it is inferred from 2 Kings xvii. 28. whence we learn that a Jewish priest was sent to teach the Samaritans the worship of Jehovah; on which occasion he must have taught them the law; and yet no mention occurs of his teaching them the language or character that the law was then written in, the character which the Samaritans used. But the chief argument is taken from some ancient Jewish shekels, with a legend on one side "The shekel of Israel," and on the other "Jerusalem the holy," both in Samaritan characters. These shekels, it is said, must have been coined before the division of the two kingdoms of Judah and Israel, or at least before the Assyrian captivity, because the Samaritans never afterwards reckoned Jerusalem holy. On the other side, or for the primitive antiquity of the square character, are the two Buxtorfs, Leusden, Calovius, Hottinger, Spanheim, Lightfoot, &c. They urge, from Matthew v. 18. that jod is really the least of the consonants in the present Hebrew, whereas it is one of the largest characters in the Samaritan alphabet: but Walton replies, that if our Saviour here speaks of the least letter of the alphabet, we can only infer, that the Chaldee character was used in our Saviour's time, which is not denied by those who maintain the Samaritan to be the original. They also allege, that the Jews were too obstinate and superstitious to allow their sacred character to be altered; but if this was done under the direction and authority of Ezra, the argument will be much invalidated. Further, they say, that Ezra could not alter the ancient character, because it was impossible to make the alterations in all their copies. This argument, however, is contradicted by fact; since the old English black letter is actually changed for the Roman. They say, likewise, that Ezra was not disposed to profane the sacred writings with a heathen character: but this supposes that Ezra was so superstitious as to imagine, that there was some peculiar sanctity in the shape of the letters. Moreover, the advocates for this opinion appeal to ancient coins found in Judea, with a legend in the Chaldee or Assyrian character. But the genuineness of these coins is much suspected.
The learned Jesuit Societ maintains, with great address, that the ancient Hebrew character is that found on the medals of Simon, and others, commonly called Samaritan medals; but which, he asserts, were really Hebrew medals, struck by the Jews, and not the Samaritans.
Buxtorf endeavours to reconcile these two opinions, by producing a variety of passages from the rabbies to prove, that both these characters were anciently used; the present square character being that in which the tables of the law, and the copy deposited in the ark, were written; and the other character being used in the copies of the law which were written for private and common use, and in civil affairs in general; and that after the captivity, Ezra enjoined the former to be used by the Jews on all occasions, leaving the latter to the Samaritans and apostates. But it can hardly be allowed by any who consider the difference between the Chaldee and Samaritan characters, with respect to convenience and beauty, that they were ever used at the same time. After all, it is of no great moment
which of these, or whether either of them, were the original characters; since it appears, that no change of the words has arisen from the manner of writing them, because the Samaritan and Jewish Pentateuch almost always agree after so many ages. It is most probable that the form of these characters has varied in different periods; this appears from the testimony of Montfaucon, in his Hexapla Origenis, vol. i. p. 22. &c. and is implied in Dr Kennicott's making the characters in which manuscripts are written one test of their age.
2. The modern, or rabbinical, is a good neat character, formed of the square Hebrew, by rounding it, and retrenching most of the angles or corners of the letters, to make it the more easy and flowing. The letters used by the Germans are very different from the rabbinical character used everywhere else, though all formed alike from the square character, by the German in a more slovenly manner than the rest.—The rabbins frequently make use either of their own, or the square Hebrew character, to write the modern languages in. There are even books in the vulgar tongues printed in Hebrew characters; instances whereof are seen in the French king's library.