Community hub
0 subscribers8 pages, 0 posts
Recent from talks
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Welcome to the community hub built to collect knowledge and have discussions related to Samaritan script.
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Samaritan script
View on Wikipediafrom Wikipedia
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (September 2021) |
| Samaritan | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Script type | |
Period | 4th century CE – present |
| Direction | Right-to-left script, top-to-bottom  |
| Languages | Samaritan Hebrew, Samaritan Aramaic |
| Related scripts | |
Parent systems | |
| ISO 15924 | |
| ISO 15924 | Samr (123), Samaritan |
| Unicode | |
Unicode alias | Samaritan |
| U+0800–U+083F | |
The Samaritan Hebrew script, or simply Samaritan script, is the alphabet used by the Samaritans for their religious and liturgical writings. It serves as the script of the Samaritan Pentateuch, of texts in Samaritan Hebrew, and of commentaries and translations in Samaritan Aramaic and occasionally Arabic.
Historically, the Samaritan script is a direct descendant of the paleo-Hebrew alphabet, the script in which much of the Hebrew Bible was originally written and which was used by the people of Israel and Judah during the Iron Age. In classical antiquity, the better-known "square" Hebrew alphabet—a stylized form of the Aramaic script known as Ashurit (אשורי, “Assyrian”)—came into use and, from the period of the Babylonian exile onward, became the standard script of Jewish writing. Paleo-Hebrew letter forms, however, continued to appear on Jewish coinage and in certain sacred contexts, while both paleo-Hebrew and Aramaic scripts are attested among the Samaritans in this period.
The precise date of the Samaritan script's emergence is debated. Some scholars have argued that it diverged from paleo-Hebrew in the late Hasmonean or early Roman period. More recent epigraphic and archaeological research, however, indicates that the script was developed in the 4th century CE. Inscriptions, mosaic texts, and inscribed pottery lamps attest to its use from Late Antiquity onward.
History
[edit]The Samaritan script derives from the ancient paleo-Hebrew alphabet,[2] which was used in ancient Israel during the Iron Age. Although most Jews adopted the square Aramaic ("Jewish") script during the Second Temple period, paleo-Hebrew letter forms were preserved on Jewish coins from the First Jewish Revolt (66–70 CE) and the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132–135 CE). Samaritan traditions and Jewish sources (e.g., the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 21b) suggest that the Samaritans continued to use paleo-Hebrew for sacred texts into Late Antiquity, possibly as late as the 3rd century CE.[3]
Scholars differ on the precise date of the Samaritan script's emergence.[4] Frank Moore Cross, James Purvis, and others argued that it branched from the paleo-Hebrew alphabet during the late Hasmonean or early Roman period, while some have suggested a 1st-century CE origin.[4] More recent research by Dan Barag, based on epigraphic and archaeological evidence—such as inscribed lamps, mosaic inscriptions, and architectural fragments—indicates that the Samaritan alphabet was created in the 4th century CE.[5]
Inscriptions from Mount Gerizim provide important early evidence for the history of Samaritan writing. Hundreds of texts in Aramaic and Jewish "square" script, along with a handful in palaeo-Hebrew, have been discovered at the site, all predating the destruction of the Samaritan temple by John Hyrcanus in 113/112 BCE.[6] None of these are written in the Samaritan script, a fact that suggests the alphabet was not yet in use during this period.[6]
The first clear attestations of the Samaritan script appear only several centuries later. A notable example is the Emmaus Capital, a limestone capital inscribed with a Samaritan blessing alongside the Greek invocation Εἷς Θεός ("One God").[7] Although some scholars once proposed a 1st-century CE date, the use of this Greek formula indicates that the inscription cannot predate the mid-4th century CE.[7] Similarly, the lintel from Beit el-Ma, discovered near Shechem, bears a Samaritan version of the Ten Commandments. Scholarly opinion on its dating has ranged from the 3rd to the 12th century, but the prevailing view places it within the late Roman or Byzantine period, between the 4th and 6th centuries CE.[8]
The use of the script by the Samaritans is documented as early as the 4th century CE by the Christian scholar Jerome, who records having seen authentic examples of Samaritan writing.[9][10] In one of his works, he remarks:
That twenty-two letters are in use among the Hebraei [Jews] is also confirmed by the language of the Syri and the Chaldaei, which is to a large degree closely related. [...] The Samaritans also are accustomed to write the Pentateuch of Moses in the same number of letters, but differing in their shapes and terminations. And it is certain that Ezra, the scribe and teacher of the Law, subsequent to the capture of Jerusalem and the re-dedication of the Temple under Zorababel, invented different letters, which we now use, while up to that time the characters used by the Samaritans and the Hebraei had been the same.[11][10]
During the Byzantine period, the Samaritan script appears in mosaic inscriptions discovered in several Samaritan synagogues. At Sha'alvim, a mosaic dating to the 4th–6th centuries CE preserves the biblical acclamation "The Lord will reign forever and ever" (Exod. 15:18), placed near the site of the bimah and Ark of the Law.[12] Other mosaic inscriptions in the Samaritan script have been found at El-Khirbe and Tzur Natan. At Beit She'an, a mosaic inscription in Samaritan script was uncovered in a room adjoining a synagogue.[12] Further evidence for the Samaritan script in Late Antiquity comes from inscribed amulets, rings, and bracelets (many from the coastal plain and the Samarian hills), most dating between the late Roman and Byzantine periods (4th–6th centuries CE).[13]
According to Dan Barag, the development of a distinct Samaritan script should be seen as part of a wider effort to preserve Samaritan religious and cultural identity during a period of Christian expansion and missionary activity. The adoption of a new alphabet derived from the older Hebrew script may also have reflected a desire to distance Samaritan practice from Jewish traditions considered outdated.[14] Prominent figures such as the high priest Baba Rabba or the scholar Marqah might have been connected with this cultural revival, although there is no direct evidence of their involvement. What is clear, however, is that the emergence of the script formed part of a deliberate process of differentiation and self-preservation.[14]
Research history
[edit]The Samaritan alphabet first became known to the Western world with the publication of a manuscript of the Samaritan Pentateuch in 1631 by Jean Morin.[15] In 1616 the traveler Pietro della Valle had purchased a copy of the text in Damascus, and this manuscript, now known as Codex B, was deposited in a Parisian library.[16]
Letters
[edit] |
Consonants
[edit]| Letter | Name | IPA | Approximate western European pronunciation | Jewish Hebrew equivalent |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ࠀ | ʾālāf | ∅ ~ [ʔ] | Either silent or like in _uh-_oh. Also used as mater lectionis for certain open vowels. | א |
| ࠁ | bīt | [b] | Like in bear. | ב |
| ࠂ | gāʾman | [g] | Like in goat. | ג |
| ࠃ | dāʾlāt | [d] | Like in dingle. | ד |
| ࠄ | ʾīy | ∅ ~ [ʔ] ~ [h] | Either silent or like in _uh-_oh. | ה |
| ࠅ | bå̄ | [b], [w] | Usually like in bear, but like in water in certain situations. Also used as mater lectionis for certain back vowels. | ו |
| ࠆ | zēn | [z] | Like in zax. | ז |
| ࠇ | ʿīt | ∅ ~ [ʔ], [ʕ] ~ [ꭓ] | No equivalent pronunciation in Standard English. Like Scottish loch, but voiced, but usually either silent or like in _uh-_oh. | ח |
| ࠈ | ṭīt | [tˤ] | No equivalent pronunciation in Standard English, like a /t/ sound but emphatic. | ט |
| ࠉ | yūt | [j] | Like in yolk. Also used as mater lectionis for certain close vowels. | י |
| ࠊ | kāf | [k] | Like in skirt. | כ |
| ࠋ | lāʾbāt | [l] | Like in luck. | ל |
| ࠌ | mīm | [m] | Like in mother. | מ |
| ࠍ | nūn | [n] | Like in night. | נ |
| ࠎ | sinʾgå̄t | [s] | Like in sight. | ס |
| ࠏ | ʿīn | [ʕ], ∅ ~ [ʔ] | No equivalent pronunciation in Standard English. Like Scottish loch, but voiced, but usually either silent or like in _uh-_oh. | ע |
| ࠐ | fī | [f], [bː] | No equivalent pronunciation in Standard English. Usually like in father. | פ |
| ࠑ | ṣå̄ʾdīy | [sˤ] | No equivalent pronunciation in Standard English, like an /s/ sound but emphatic. | צ |
| ࠒ | qūf | [q] | No equivalent pronunciation in Standard English. Like Multicultural London English cut. | ק |
| ࠓ | rīš | [r] | No equivalent pronunciation in Standard English. Like Scottish right. | ר |
| ࠔ | šān | [ʃ] | Like in short. | ש |
| ࠕ | tå̄f | [t] | Like in rat. | ת |
A cursive style of the alphabet also exists.
Niqqud
[edit]| Niqqud | Name | IPA | Approximate western European pronunciation |
|---|---|---|---|
| ࠫ | o | [o] | Like in home but as a monophthong. |
| ࠪ | i | [i] | Like in General American fleece. |
| ࠩ | ī | [iː] | Like in Received Pronunciation fleece. |
| ࠨ | î | ||
| ࠧ | u | [u] | Like in General American goose. |
| ࠦ | ū | [uː] | Like in Received Pronunciation goose. |
| ࠥ | ă | ||
| ࠤ | ă | ||
| ࠣ | a | ||
| ࠢ | ā | ||
| ࠡ | āː | ||
| ࠠ | å | ||
| ࠠ | å̄ | ||
| ࠞ | å̄ː | ||
| ࠝ | e | ||
| ࠜ | ē | ||
| ࠛ | Marks epethentic yūt. | ||
| ࠚ | Marks an epethentic yût. | ||
| ࠬ | ∅ | Marks the absence of a vowel. | |
| ࠙ | Marks gemination. | ||
| ࠘ | Marks occlusion. | ||
| ࠗ | |||
| ࠖ |
Punctuation
[edit]| Punctuation mark | Name | Function |
|---|---|---|
| ࠭ | nequdaa | Variant reading sign. |
| ࠰ | nequdaa | Word separator. |
| ࠱ | afsaaq | Interruption. |
| ࠲ | afsed | Restraint. |
| ࠳ | bau | Prayer. |
| ࠴ | atmau | Surprise. |
| ࠵ | shiyyaalaa | Question. |
| ࠶ | Abbreviation mark. | |
| ࠷ | Melodic qitsa. | |
| ࠸ | ziqaa | Shouting. |
| ࠹ | qitsa | End of section. |
| ࠺ | zef | Outburst. |
| ࠻ | turu | Teaching. |
| ࠼ | arkaanu | Submissiveness. |
| ࠽ | sof mashfaat | Full stop. |
| ࠾ | annaau | Rest. |
Unicode
[edit]Samaritan script was added to the Unicode Standard in October 2009 with the release of version 5.2.
The Unicode block for Samaritan is U+0800–U+083F:
| Samaritan[1][2] Official Unicode Consortium code chart (PDF) | ||||||||||||||||
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | |
| U+080x | ࠀ | ࠁ | ࠂ | ࠃ | ࠄ | ࠅ | ࠆ | ࠇ | ࠈ | ࠉ | ࠊ | ࠋ | ࠌ | ࠍ | ࠎ | ࠏ |
| U+081x | ࠐ | ࠑ | ࠒ | ࠓ | ࠔ | ࠕ | ࠖ | ࠗ | ࠘ | ࠙ | ࠚ | ࠛ | ࠜ | ࠝ | ࠞ | ࠟ |
| U+082x | ࠠ | ࠡ | ࠢ | ࠣ | ࠤ | ࠥ | ࠦ | ࠧ | ࠨ | ࠩ | ࠪ | ࠫ | ࠬ | ࠭ | ||
| U+083x | ࠰ | ࠱ | ࠲ | ࠳ | ࠴ | ࠵ | ࠶ | ࠷ | ࠸ | ࠹ | ࠺ | ࠻ | ࠼ | ࠽ | ࠾ | |
| Notes | ||||||||||||||||
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Himelfarb, Elizabeth J. "First Alphabet Found in Egypt", Archaeology 53, Issue 1 (Jan./Feb. 2000): 21.
- ^ Barag 2009, p. 319.
- ^ Barag 2009, p. 318.
- ^ a b Barag 2009, p. 303.
- ^ Barag 2009, pp. 319, 321.
- ^ a b Barag 2009, pp. 303–304, 318.
- ^ a b Barag 2009, pp. 311–314, 318–319.
- ^ Barag 2009, pp. 314–315.
- ^ Jerome, Commentary on Ezekiel 9:4–6
- ^ a b Millar, Fergus (2010). Jerome and Palestine. Scripta Classica Israelica, 29, p. 74
- ^ Jerome, Prologue to the Books of Kings
- ^ a b Barag 2009, pp. 316–317.
- ^ Barag 2009, pp. 317–318.
- ^ a b Barag 2009, p. 321.
- ^ Exercitationes ecclesiasticae in utrumque Samaritanorum Pentateuchum, 1631
- ^ Flôrenṭîn 2005, p. 1: "When the Samaritan version of the Pentateuch was revealed to the Western world early in the 17th century... [footnote: 'In 1632 the Frenchman Jean Morin published the Samaritan Pentateuch in the Parisian Biblia Polyglotta based on a manuscript that the traveler Pietro Della Valle had bought from Damascus sixteen years previously.]"
Bibliography
[edit]- Barag, Dan (2009). "Samaritan writing and writings". From Hellenism To Islam: Cultural and Linguistic Change in the Roman Near East. Cambridge University Press. pp. 303–323. ISBN 978-0-521-87581-3.
- Flôrenṭîn, Moše (2005). Late Samaritan Hebrew: A Linguistic Analysis of Its Different Types. Brill. ISBN 978-900413841-4.
External links
[edit]- A Samaritan Bible, at the British library Archived 2013-11-03 at the Wayback Machine
- Omniglot.com - Samaritan alphabet
- Link to free Samaritan font (consonants only as of 2010)
- Online keyboard for Samaritan script
Samaritan script
View on Grokipediafrom Grokipedia
The Samaritan script, also known as the Samaritan Hebrew alphabet, is a writing system derived from the ancient Paleo-Hebrew script and used exclusively by the Samaritan community for their religious, liturgical, and literary texts, including the Samaritan Pentateuch.[1] It consists of 22 consonants written from right to left, retaining linear and angular letter forms that distinguish it from the square Aramaic-influenced script adopted by Jewish communities during the Babylonian exile.[2] Unlike the modern Hebrew alphabet, the Samaritan script preserves earlier Phoenician and Paleo-Hebrew characteristics, such as the absence of ligatures and the use of optional diacritical marks for vowels and consonants, including sukun (for silent consonants), dagesh (for emphasis), and nequdaa (for punctuation and emphasis).[1] These features reflect its role in maintaining a distinct textual tradition, with the script's full orthography—indicating matres lectionis for vowels—emerging prominently in the Hasmonean period around the 2nd century BCE, following the destruction of the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim.[3]
Historically, the Samaritan script originated from the Paleo-Hebrew alphabet used in ancient Israel before the 6th century BCE exile, which the Samaritans preserved due to their continued presence in the region, avoiding the shift to the Aramaic square script that occurred among exiled Jews under Ezra's reforms.[4] This retention served to emphasize Samaritan religious and cultural separation from Judaism, particularly after conflicts in the Hasmonean era, when the script became a sectarian marker for Samaritan manuscripts and inscriptions.[3] Early attestations appear in coins and seals from the Persian and Hellenistic periods, showing paleo-Hebrew influences, while by the Roman period, it had developed unique traits like serifs and dots for word separation, as noted by scholars such as Jerome in the 4th century CE.[4] Today, the script remains in active use among the approximately 1,000 Samaritans worldwide as of 2024, appearing in Torah scrolls, prayer books, and even a weekly newspaper, underscoring its enduring significance as a symbol of communal identity and continuity with ancient Israelite traditions.[1][5]
Historical Development
Origins in Paleo-Hebrew
The Paleo-Hebrew script emerged as the foundational writing system for the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah, dating back to approximately the 10th century BCE, and served as the direct precursor to the Samaritan script. Derived from the Phoenician alphabet around 900 BCE, it consisted of 22 consonantal letters arranged in an abjad structure, written from right to left without initial vowel notation. This script reflected broader Semitic alphabetic traditions originating in the northern Levant during the late 2nd millennium BCE, adapting Phoenician forms to inscribe early Hebrew texts on stone, pottery, and other media.[2][6][7] Archaeological evidence from Iron Age inscriptions demonstrates the script's early use and its continuity with later Samaritan letter forms. The Gezer Calendar, a limestone tablet from the late 10th century BCE discovered at Tel Gezer, records agricultural seasons in a rudimentary Hebrew dialect using distinct Paleo-Hebrew characters, such as angular aleph and waw shapes that parallel those preserved in Samaritan manuscripts. Similarly, the Siloam Inscription from around 700 BCE, carved into the wall of Hezekiah's Tunnel in Jerusalem, employs elegant Paleo-Hebrew letters—including a prominent yod and nun—to narrate the tunnel's construction, showcasing shared angular and linear features with the Samaritan alphabet's archaic style. These artifacts highlight the script's prevalence in administrative and monumental contexts across ancient Israel and Judah before regional divergences.[6][8] The Samaritan community initially adopted and perpetuated this Paleo-Hebrew script during the tumultuous 8th to 6th centuries BCE, amid the Assyrian conquest of the northern Kingdom of Israel in 722 BCE and the subsequent Babylonian exile of Judah in 586 BCE. As remnants of the Israelite population in Samaria navigated Assyrian resettlement policies, they maintained the script for religious and communal records, avoiding the Aramaic influences that later affected Judean scribes. This retention stemmed from the Samaritans' uninterrupted presence in the region, preserving the Phoenician-influenced right-to-left directionality and consonantal abjad as core traits, which distinguished their tradition from emerging square scripts elsewhere.[3][9][10]Divergence and Evolution
The Samaritan script developed its distinct form from Paleo-Hebrew roots during the late Second Temple and early Roman periods, coinciding with the deepening Samaritan-Jewish schism. While Jews increasingly adopted the Aramaic square script following the Babylonian exile in the 6th century BCE and its full entrenchment under Persian and Hellenistic influences, Samaritans preserved archaic Paleo-Hebrew forms as a marker of religious and cultural distinction. This separation was reinforced by events such as the destruction of the Mount Gerizim temple by John Hyrcanus in 128 BCE, after which Samaritans maintained their script for sacred texts to assert continuity with ancient Israelite traditions.[10] Archaeological evidence from the Roman and Byzantine periods illustrates the script's established distinctiveness in Samaritan contexts. A notable artifact is the column capital from Emmaus-Nicopolis (modern Imwas), featuring a bilingual Greek-Samaritan inscription dated to the 5th or 6th century CE, which quotes biblical verses and demonstrates the script's application in communal settings. Similarly, Byzantine-era mosaics, such as the 5th-century Greek blessing inscription discovered at Zur-Nathan, a Samaritan site in the Sharon Plain, underscore the community's presence and use of sacred notations.[11][12][13] In the medieval period, the Samaritan script underwent minor stylistic refinements, particularly in Torah manuscripts from the 9th to 12th centuries CE, while retaining its core Paleo-Hebrew identity for liturgical purposes. Surviving codices, such as the early 12th-century Cambridge Add. 1846 manuscript, show subtle evolutions in letter forms and the introduction of partial vowel notation akin to contemporary Jewish systems, adapting to scribal practices without altering fundamental shapes. These changes were limited, preserving the script's archaic features to safeguard religious texts against external influences.[14][15] Although exposed to regional scripts like Nabataean and Syriac through trade and proximity in the Levant, the Samaritan script exhibited minimal assimilation, prioritizing its Paleo-Hebrew essence to maintain doctrinal separation from Jewish and Christian traditions. Paleographic studies confirm that any superficial adaptations, such as slight angular modifications in certain letters, did not compromise its distinct lineage, ensuring continuity in Samaritan religious expression up to the medieval era.[16]Scholarly Study
Early Western Knowledge
The initial European encounter with the Samaritan script occurred in the early 17th century through the acquisition of Samaritan manuscripts. In 1616, the Italian traveler and scholar Pietro della Valle purchased a complete codex of the Samaritan Pentateuch during his visit to Damascus, marking the first such manuscript to enter Western collections.[17] This codex, later designated as Codex B and housed in the French National Library, provided scholars with direct access to the script's distinctive form, which preserved archaic features distinct from the square Hebrew script. The manuscript's significance was soon realized through scholarly publication. In 1631, French orientalist Jean Morin edited and published the text of Codex B in his work Exercitationes ecclesiasticae in utrumque Samaritanorum Pentateuchum, the first printed edition of the Samaritan Pentateuch in Europe. Morin's edition included transcriptions of the Samaritan script alongside the Masoretic Hebrew text, facilitating comparisons that highlighted variants in orthography and content, though it also perpetuated early views of the script as a derivative or altered version of Hebrew.[18] This publication sparked interest among biblical scholars, who began examining the script's paleographic traits in relation to ancient Semitic alphabets. By the 19th century, direct explorations in Palestine advanced Western understanding of the Samaritan script's living use. In 1838, American biblical scholar Edward Robinson visited the Samaritan community in Nablus (ancient Shechem), where he observed and documented their manuscripts and inscriptions, confirming the script's ongoing liturgical role among the Samaritans.[19] Robinson's accounts in Biblical Researches in Palestine emphasized the script's continuity from ancient times, countering some prior dismissals. Complementing this, German orientalist August Knobel published Zur Geschichte der Samaritaner in 1846, which included discussions and reproductions of Samaritan texts, aiding in the script's transcription and analysis.[20] Missionary and orientalist scholars played a pivotal role in these efforts, often transcribing Samaritan texts during fieldwork and comparing them to Hebrew and Phoenician scripts to trace epigraphic evolution. Figures such as Wilhelm Gesenius contributed detailed grammars and comparisons, revealing the Samaritan script's retention of paleo-Hebrew forms while noting its adaptations.[21] However, early interpretations frequently misconstrued the script as a "corrupted" variant of Hebrew, influenced by theological biases that portrayed Samaritan traditions as schismatic deviations rather than an independent lineage diverging in late antiquity.[17] These views began to shift with accumulating manuscript evidence, laying groundwork for more nuanced paleographic studies.Modern Research Advancements
In the late 20th century, archaeological excavations at Mount Gerizim significantly advanced the understanding of the Samaritan script through the discovery of numerous inscriptions. Directed by Yitzhak Magen from 1982 to 2006, these digs uncovered over 400 Aramaic, Hebrew, and Samaritan inscriptions dating primarily to the Persian and Hellenistic periods, including examples from the 4th century BCE that demonstrate early forms of the script used in votive contexts.[22] The comprehensive publication of these findings in 2004 provided a foundational epigraphic corpus, enabling scholars to trace the script's continuity and regional variations more accurately than previously possible.[23] Linguistic analyses during the 1980s and 1990s further refined chronologies of the script's development, with a focus on its divergence from Paleo-Hebrew. Dan Barag's paleographic study dated this divergence to the 4th century CE, positing it as a deliberate sectarian innovation that preserved archaic features while adapting to contemporary needs, based on comparisons of late antique Samaritan manuscripts and inscriptions.[24] Complementary research examined phonetic shifts in Samaritan Hebrew, revealing how the script's orthographic conventions reflected evolving vocalization patterns influenced by local dialects, as evidenced in analyses of bilingual inscriptions from the Roman era.[25] Post-2000 advancements have incorporated digital methodologies to enhance paleographic comparisons, building on the Mount Gerizim corpus. High-resolution imaging techniques, applied to inscriptions since the mid-2000s, have allowed for non-invasive analysis of faded texts, clarifying letter forms and dating through enhanced visibility of stratigraphic layers.[26] Coin analyses from the sites have corroborated 4th-century BCE dates for early Samaritan script usage.[27] Recent research as of 2025 includes digitization projects, such as the British Library's efforts to make Samaritan manuscripts accessible online, and new publications like Étienne Nodet's Les Samaritains (2023), which reevaluates Samaritan textual traditions, and surveys of Samaritan-Jewish Pentateuch differences (2025). These contribute to ongoing paleographic and linguistic studies.[28][29][30] Despite these progresses, modern research has identified persistent gaps, particularly the underemphasis on Samaritan Aramaic influences in shaping the script's phonetic and orthographic features. Earlier studies often prioritized Hebrew-centric interpretations, overlooking how Aramaic substrates contributed to unique letter adaptations observed in 3rd–5th century CE texts.[31] Scholars have called for expanded, digitized corpora of inscriptions to address these issues, with the 2004 Mount Gerizim volume serving as a model for integrating multilingual epigraphy into comprehensive databases.[24]Script Components
Consonants
The Samaritan script employs 22 consonant letters, inherited from the ancient Paleo-Hebrew alphabet and preserved distinctly by the Samaritan community for religious texts. These letters form the core of the writing system, with no inherent vowel indications, though some serve as matres lectionis in certain contexts. The script's letter order mirrors that of the Phoenician and Hebrew alphabets, facilitating comparisons across Semitic writing traditions.[32][1] The consonants exhibit variations in shape across historical periods, with ancient inscriptions from sites like Mount Gerizim displaying angular, majuscule forms suited to stone carving, while medieval manuscripts from the 12th to 16th centuries feature more rounded, minuscule styles adapted for parchment and paper. This evolution reflects both practical adaptations and stylistic developments, as documented in palaeographic studies of Samaritan codices. For instance, letters like resh and lamed simplify from angular serifs in early majuscule to smoother curves in later minuscule. Unlike the square Hebrew script, Samaritan consonants do not have distinct final forms at the end of words.[33][33] In Samaritan Hebrew phonology, the 22 letters correspond to approximately 20 distinct phonemes, as mergers have eliminated contrasts like /ḥ/ and /h/, with he and het often realized as glottal stops or absent.[34][34] The following table inventories the 22 consonants, including their standard names (from Unicode and Samaritan nomenclature), approximate IPA transcriptions based on contemporary Samaritan pronunciation, and equivalents in modern Hebrew and ancient Phoenician scripts. Numerical values follow a gematria-like system akin to Hebrew, assigning sequential numbers from 1 (alaf) to 400 (taaf), used in Samaritan exegesis for interpretive purposes.[32][34][35]| Letter (Unicode) | Name | IPA (Samaritan Hebrew) | Modern Hebrew Equivalent | Phoenician Equivalent | Numerical Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ࠀ | Alaf | /ʔ/ or ∅ | א | 𐤀 | 1 |
| ࠁ | Bit | /b/ or /v/ | ב | 𐤁 | 2 |
| ࠂ | Gaman | /ɡ/ | ג | 𐤂 | 3 |
| ࠃ | Dalat | /d/ | ד | 𐤃 | 4 |
| ࠄ | Iy | ∅ or /h/ | ה | 𐤄 | 5 |
| ࠅ | Baa | /w/ | ו | 𐤅 | 6 |
| ࠆ | Zen | /z/ | ז | 𐤆 | 7 |
| ࠇ | It | /ħ/ or ∅ | ח | 𐤇 | 8 |
| ࠈ | Tit | /tˤ/ or /t/ | ט | 𐤈 | 9 |
| ࠉ | Yut | /j/ | י | 𐤉 | 10 |
| ࠊ | Kaaf | /k/ or /x/ | כ | 𐤊 | 20 |
| ࠋ | Labat | /l/ or /lˤ/ | ל | 𐤋 | 30 |
| ࠌ | Mim | /m/ | מ | 𐤌 | 40 |
| ࠍ | Nun | /n/ | נ | 𐤍 | 50 |
| ࠎ | Singaat | /s/ | ס | 𐤎 | 60 |
| ࠏ | In | /ʕ/ or ∅ | ע | 𐤏 | 70 |
| ࠐ | Fi | /p/ or /f/ | פ | 𐤐 | 80 |
| ࠑ | Tsaadiy | /sˤ/ or /ts/ | צ | 𐤑 | 90 |
| ࠒ | Quf | /q/ or /k/ | ק | 𐤒 | 100 |
| ࠓ | Rish | /r/ | ר | 𐤓 | 200 |
| ࠔ | Shan | /ʃ/ | ש | 𐤔 | 300 |
| ࠕ | Taaf | /t/ | ת | 𐤕 | 400 |
Niqqud and Vowel Notation
The Samaritan niqqud consists of a system of diacritical marks, primarily dots and short strokes positioned above, below, or to the side of consonants, designed to denote vowel qualities and occasional gemination (consonant doubling) in Samaritan Hebrew.[36] Unlike the more comprehensive Tiberian niqqud developed for Jewish Masoretic texts, the Samaritan version is applied sporadically in manuscripts and reflects the unique phonological features of Samaritan pronunciation, such as penultimate stress and monophthongized diphthongs.[37] These marks emerged as part of an independent vocalization tradition, aiding the oral reading and melodic chanting central to Samaritan liturgical practices.[38] The system likely developed during the Byzantine period, with evidence of diacritic use appearing in Samaritan manuscripts by the 6th century CE, coinciding with efforts to standardize sacred texts amid cultural and linguistic shifts in the region.[38] This innovation played a crucial role in preserving the Samaritan oral pronunciation traditions, which differ from Tiberian Hebrew in aspects like the realization of gutturals (e.g., weaker [ʿ] and [ḥ] sounds) and vowel inventory, including six principal vowels: , [å] (a back rounded variant), , , , and .[37] Byzantine-era codices, such as those from Samaritan communities in Palestine, demonstrate early applications of these marks to ensure accurate recitation of the Torah during worship, safeguarding dialectal features against assimilation influences from Aramaic and later Arabic.[39] Specific diacritics include two vertical dots (resembling a colon) for the short [ă] vowel, a horizontal stroke for the long [ē], a single dot above for , a wavy line or hook for , and a small circle or dot cluster for , with placements typically above the consonant for front vowels and below for back ones.[36] These phonetic values align with Samaritan Hebrew's five to six vowel phonemes, where and often interchange allophonically, and no distinct shewa (reduced vowel) exists, unlike in Tiberian notation.[37] For instance, in the Samaritan Pentateuch, the word for "power" in Genesis 49:3 is vocalized as ʿaz with a short marked by two dots under the zayin, rendering [ʕaz], emphasizing the liturgical cadence.[37] Another example from Exodus 3:14, "I am" (ʾehyeh), uses a horizontal line over the initial aleph for [ē], producing [ʔehye], which highlights the tradition's preservation of archaic pronunciations for ritual chanting.[39] This niqqud system, though not as rigidly standardized as its Tiberian counterpart, underscores the Samaritans' commitment to phonetic fidelity in their Pentateuchal readings, with marks appearing more consistently in liturgical scrolls than in everyday writings.[38]Punctuation and Orthography
The Samaritan script employs a distinct set of punctuation marks to indicate pauses, sentence boundaries, and nuances in expression within religious texts, particularly the Samaritan Pentateuch. These marks, often rendered as diamond-shaped dots in traditional manuscripts, include the AFSAAQ for sentence terminals, ANGED for major divisions, and specialized symbols such as TURU (teaching), ARKAANU (submissiveness), SOF MASHFAAT (full stop), and ANNAAU (rest), which convey rhetorical or emotional tones like vehemence or humble petition.[1] Additional marks like SHIYYAALAA denote questions, while MELODIC QITSA, ZIQAA, QITSA, and ZAEF support cantillation for liturgical chanting, with combinations such as NEQUDAA + AFSAAQ used for variant readings or emphasis.[1] A small dot serves as a word separator, akin to the middle dot in other Semitic scripts.[1] These punctuation elements, script-specific and distinct from round dots in other traditions, were encoded in Unicode block U+0800–U+083F to preserve their forms.[40] Orthographic conventions in the Samaritan script follow an abjad system written right-to-left, with no ligatures or distinct final forms for letters, unlike the square Hebrew script.[1] Matres lectionis—consonant letters repurposed to indicate vowels, such as yod for /i/ and waw for /u/ or /o/—appear more frequently than in the Masoretic Text, reflecting a plene (full) spelling tendency; for instance, וישובו (wyēšūbu, "they turn back") in Exodus 14:2 uses additional matres for clarity.[41] This fuller orthography aids in unambiguous reading during liturgy, contrasting with the more defective spelling in Jewish traditions. Samaritan texts generally avoid the rabbinic-style abbreviations common in Jewish manuscripts, such as suspended letters or sigla for divine names, opting instead for an abbreviation mark (U+0836) when expansions are needed in scholarly works.[36] Layout in Samaritan Torah scrolls adheres to columnar formatting, with text arranged in vertical columns on parchment to facilitate ritual reading, similar to ancient Semitic practices but adapted for the script's angular forms.[42] Lines are justified for aesthetic uniformity, ensuring even spacing between words and columns, while the right-to-left directionality handles bidirectional elements seamlessly in mixed-language contexts like Samaritan Aramaic annotations. Unique ritual features include the occasional enlargement of initial letters, such as the bet in Genesis 1:1 (בְּרֵאשִׁית, "in the beginning"), symbolizing blessing and structural emphasis in sacred copying.[42] These conventions, rooted in pre-Common Era traditions, emphasize precision and sanctity in transmission.[1]Contemporary Aspects
Modern Usage in Samaritan Community
The Samaritan script remains integral to the religious practices of the approximately 900-member Samaritan community, split between Holon (some 460) in central Israel and Kiryat Luza (some 380) on Mount Gerizim near Nablus in the West Bank as of 2024, where it is employed for reading the Samaritan Pentateuch during Torah services and liturgical prayers. In these communities, the script facilitates the recitation of sacred texts in Samaritan Hebrew, a dialect preserved orally and in writing exclusively by Samaritans, distinguishing their worship from Jewish traditions that adopted the square Aramaic script centuries earlier.[43] This usage underscores the script's role in maintaining liturgical continuity, as all Samaritan holy writings, including prayer books and hymns, continue to be produced in the traditional Paleo-Hebrew-derived form.[44] Education in the Samaritan script is embedded in community institutions, with schools in Holon and Kiryat Luza teaching children the alphabet, vocabulary, and orthography as part of religious and cultural curricula.[45] The A.B. Institute of Samaritan Studies in Holon, operational since 1981, offers advanced courses on the script's application in Torah study and manuscript copying, ensuring transmission to younger generations amid daily use of Modern Hebrew in Israel and Levantine Arabic in the West Bank.[45] Recent initiatives in the 2010s, such as the National Library of Israel's funded digitization of Samaritan manuscripts, have made high-resolution copies of script-based texts accessible online, supporting preservation and scholarly access while aiding community education.[46] These efforts include digitizing collections at the National Library of Paris and the British Library, completed by 2019-2020. Post-2020 revival efforts have leveraged digital tools to counter declining literacy, including the 2022 release of the "Samaritan Alphabet" mobile app, which provides interactive lessons on the 22 consonants and their role in sacred writings like the Pentateuch.[47] These resources, alongside online newsletters like A.B. The Samaritan News, promote script proficiency among youth facing modernization pressures, such as integration into Israeli and Palestinian societies where Latin and Arabic scripts dominate secular communication.[48] Despite such initiatives, literacy challenges persist due to the community's small size and linguistic shifts, with the replacement of Arabic by Modern Hebrew among Israeli Samaritans prompting a partial revival but highlighting risks of erosion in traditional reading skills.[49] The Samaritan script holds profound cultural significance as an emblem of ethnic and religious identity, symbolizing the community's claim to ancient Israelite heritage and separation from Jewish and broader Semitic scriptural norms.[50] In daily life, its exclusive religious application reinforces boundaries against Arabic and Latin influences, fostering a sense of distinctiveness and resilience for the Samaritans, who view the script as a living link to their Torah-centered worldview.[51] This role has intensified in recent decades, with preservation projects not only safeguarding the script but also bolstering communal cohesion amid geopolitical tensions between Israel and Palestine.[49]Digital Representation and Unicode
The Samaritan script was added to the Unicode Standard in version 5.2, released in October 2009, within the dedicated block U+0800–U+083F. This block allocates 64 code points to support the script's core elements, including 22 consonants encoded at U+0800 to U+0815 (such as U+0800 SAMARITAN LETTER ALAF and U+0815 SAMARITAN LETTER TAAF), niqqud for vowel notation and modifiers primarily at U+0816 to U+082D (encompassing six consonant modifiers like U+0816 SAMARITAN MARK IN and 17 vowel signs like U+081C SAMARITAN VOWEL SIGN LONG E), and 15 punctuation marks at U+0830 to U+083E (such as U+0830 SAMARITAN PUNCTUATION NEQUDAA and U+0839 SAMARITAN PUNCTUATION SOF SOKHAN).[52] Font development has enhanced digital accessibility, with Google's Noto Sans Samaritan providing comprehensive glyph coverage as part of the Noto font family initiative launched in the early 2010s to support underrepresented scripts. This font, distributed via Google Fonts, includes 68 glyphs for unmodulated sans-serif rendering suitable for both print and digital display. Operating system integration has progressed steadily post-Unicode inclusion. Microsoft Windows added native rendering support for the Samaritan script in Windows 11 (released in 2021), leveraging fonts from the system's Sans Serif Collection to handle text layout and combining characters.[53] On mobile platforms, input methods such as the Keyman keyboard—available for iOS, Android, and other devices—enable users to type Samaritan characters directly, facilitating community-driven digital content creation.[54] As a right-to-left script, Samaritan benefits from standard bidirectional text algorithms in modern web standards, with HTML and CSS properties likedirection: rtl and unicode-bidi: embed ensuring correct mixing with left-to-right content since Unicode 5.2. Despite these advances, rendering challenges remain in some legacy PDF tools, where incomplete support for RTL combining sequences can result in misaligned niqqud or punctuation, though updates in libraries like HarfBuzz have mitigated this in contemporary applications.