What script did God use to engrave the Ten Commandments on the two tablets of stone He had made, and with what script did Moses write the “Book of the Covenant”?  

 

If one believes that God sealed His covenant with some form of documentation, then He had to use writing that everyone could read.

 

The official script of ancient Egypt was hieroglyphics. The earliest hieroglyphs were developed in about 3200 to 3000 BCE, and hieroglyphics became fully developed at the time of the Old Kingdom between about 2686 to 2181 BCE.

 

Hieroglyphics is a pictorial script, in which each word was represented by a symbol. By the Middle Kingdom (circa 2000 BCE) it had about 700 to 800 commonly used hieroglyphs. Years of training were required to master its writing. Basic literacy took only a few years of training, but advanced proficiency, including knowledge of grammar, artistic composition, and specialized vocabulary, took a decade or more of training. High-ranking scribes who inscribed royal tombs, temples, and complex religious texts would train for 20 plus years to perfect their skills. A cursive form of hieroglyphs called hieratic was also used by scribes.

 

It is conceivable that Moses had some familiarity with hieroglyphics given his educational years spent in the royal palace, but it is doubtful that any other Israelite who left Egypt would have been able to read more than a few words.

 

One can therefore say with a fair degree of certainty, that the Ten Commandments and the Book of the Covenant were not written in hieroglyphics.

 

There was also another script known in ancient Egypt that we call proto-Sinaitic script. Whether it was widely known is questionable, since it might have been suppressed by the official scribes. It could have been used by enterprising slaves and workers to send messages to each other or to record instructions.

 

Proto-Sinaitic script was a phonetic rather than a pictorial one. Each letter represented a sound rather than a word. Most people use thousands of words but only a limited number of sounds are needed to express them. In this particular script, each sound was represented by a letter. Because this script was originally devised in Egypt, the letters used were hieroglyphic letters, and the sound represented was the first consonant of the pictorial representation. For example, the word for water in Hebrew is mayim. The hieroglyphic symbol for water is a squiggly line and this symbol was used to represent the first consonantal sound of this hieroglyphic word, namely the sound mu. With 22 hieroglyphic symbols it was possible to vocalize the sounds of all the consonants of the Hebrew language (although there were probably 27 or 29 letters in the early stage of this alphabet). At this stage, the vowels of a word were not represented. 1

 

Since this was the only other script available at the time of the Exodus, and this script was very suitable for the needs of the Israelites, the presumption has to be that this was the script used by God for writing the Ten Commandments and by Moses when he wrote the Book of the Covenant.

 

But was it available at the time of the Exodus?

 

 

Evidence of Egyptian proto-Sinaitic script

 

Early evidence of a proto-Sinaitic script was discovered by the British archaeologist Sir William Flinders Petrie in the early 20th century in ancient turquoise mines at Serabit el-Khadim in the Sinai Peninsula. The writing was found mainly on small stone slabs and monuments. Its location in the Sinai Peninsula explains why it was called proto-Sinaitic.

 

Proto-Sinaitic script has been dated to the time of the Egyptian Middle Kingdom, to between about 1900 to 1700 BCE based on a combination of archaeological, epigraphic, and historical methods. The inscriptions were found in association with Egyptian artifacts and structures, including a Temple of Hathor, the Egyptian goddess of mining, that was used during the 12th and 13th Dynasties of the Middle Kingdom. Many of the inscription were found next to or mixed with Egyptian hieroglyphic texts that mention pharaohs, officials, and mining expeditions, some of which mention Middle Kingdom rulers. Organic material found in the mining sites, such as wooden tools, charcoal, and remains of miners’ camps, were also dated to the time of the Middle Kingdom using carbon dating.

 

The range of 1900 to 1700 BCE is widely, although not universally accepted. Some investigators have suggested a later date of 1850 to 1550 BCE because of evidence of continued mining activity at Serabit el-Khadim into the Second Intermediate Period, and also evidence of greater linguistic refinement in some of the inscriptions.

 

Christopher Rollston has emphasized paleographic (letter shape) comparisons with later Semitic inscriptions and argued that some of the Serabit inscriptions appear more developed than others, implying a gradual evolution of the script.2 He suggested that the Proto-Sinaitic inscriptions appear in phases, and that later examples could belong to the Hyksos-period (c. 1650 to 1550 BCE).

 

Orly Goldwasser also considered the script as part of a linguistic evolution that took place over a longer timeframe than previously thought.3 She suggested that the inscriptions should be linked to the late 12th Dynasty and 13th Dynasties and extending into the early Second Intermediate Period, and she suggested a dating of 1850 to 1550 BCE.

​

Other evidence of this script was found in the late 1990s by Yale University researchers John and Deborah Darnell at Wadi el-Hol. This is a desert valley west of Thebes near an ancient Egyptian military and trade route, and the inscriptions were found carved into a rock face. The surrounding area contained Middle Kingdom inscriptions, providing a time frame for when this site was in active use from around 1900 to 1800 BCE. The presence of Middle Kingdom pottery and artifacts also helped anchor the period of human activity at this site. The similarity of this writing to Egyptian Middle Kingdom hieratic writing supported an evolutionary approach to this writing. No direct radiocarbon dating was possible, since the inscriptions were on rock, leading to a margin of uncertainty of a century or so.

​

Unlike those of Wadi el-Hol and Serabit el-Khadim, the proto-Sinaitic inscriptions at Lahun on ostraca (pottery fragments) or rock surfaces have not been well-published or widely studied. Lahun is a site in Faiyum, Egypt, known for its connection to the 12th Dynasty of the Middle Kingdom. It is the location of the pyramid of Pharaoh Senusret II and a nearby workers’ village. The site has yielded many important papyri (e.g., the Lahun Papyri) containing Middle Egyptian texts. Based on the evidence, these inscriptions have been dated to the late 19th to early 18th century BCE.

​

Who invented the proto-Sinaitic script?

​

Proto-Sinaitic script bears a close resemblance to old Hebrew script, and a number of scholars have speculated that the former may have been invented by the Hebrews, although this is a minority view.4

The problem is that It is unclear from the Torah as to when Jacob’s family first arrived in Egypt.

The Covenant of the Pieces between Abraham and YHWH states:

​

He [YHWH] said to Avram, "Know with certainty that your offspring will be foreigners in a land not their own, and they will enslave them and they will oppress them four hundred years (Genesis 15:13).

 

However, this prophecy continues:

 

And the fourth generation will return here, because the iniquity of the Emorites is not yet complete"  (ibid 15:16).

 

An obvious contradiction is that four generations do not equal 400 years. It is difficult to ascribe this to variant texts since we are dealing with a single prophecy.

​

The approach of traditional Jewish commentators has been to attempt to harmonize these two sentences. Hence, the authoritative medieval commentator Rashi joins the phrase “400 years” to “your offspring will be foreigners in a land not their own — four hundred years” rather than to enslavement and oppression. This is a very acceptable interpretation. Based on the fact that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob sojourned in a land that was not their own and using chronology given in the Torah, it works out that the Israelites were in Egypt for only 210 years.5

 

Nevertheless, there is another verse in the Book of Exodus that would seem to negate this explanation:

​

The habitation of the Children of Israel during which they dwelled in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years. It was at the end of the end of four hundred and thirty years, and it was on that very day that all the legions of YHWH left the land of Egypt (Exodus 12:40-41).

 

Rashi notes that when compiling the Septuagint, the Sages added the phrase “and in other lands” to this sentence above, rendering the verse: “And the habitation of the Children of Israel which they dwelled in Egypt and in other lands was four hundred and thirty years.”6 

​

Support for the 200-year figure could come from the story of Joseph, in that it has been suggested that Joseph served as advisor to the Hyksos, an idea which I support in my essay “Joseph — the right person at the right place at the right time.”

​

The Hyksos period in Egyptian history was during the Second Intermediate Period when the Hyksos, a foreign Semitic-speaking group, ruled parts of Egypt, particularly Lower Egypt (i.e., northern Egypt, including the Nile Delta). This period began in 1650 BCE and their rule ended in about 1550 BCE when the Hyksos were expelled from Egypt by Ahmose I, the first pharaoh of the New Kingdom. From the beginning of the Hyksos period to the time of the Exodus was approximately 200 years.

 

In conclusion, it seems unlikely that Hebrews wrote the initial inscriptions at Serabit el-Khadim and Wadi el-Hol since they were not yet in Egypt. However, at some time during their stay in Egypt, possibly while working as slaves, the Israelites discovered this script and appreciated its usefulness. It is likely, therefore, that the proto-Sinaitic script was the script used both by God and Moses when he wrote his Book of the Covenant.

​

How did the proto-Sinaitic script spread within Canaan?

​

It is commonly assumed that Canaanite employees or Canaanite slaves working in Sinai and/or Egypt took knowledge of this script back with them to Canaan. A more reasonable hypothesis, however, is that knowledge of this script existed among the Hebrew slaves in Egypt, and they brought this script to Canaan when they invaded Canaan. The name proto-Canaanite is likely therefore a complete misnomer.

​

To examine this hypothesis, we need an accurate date for the Exodus from Egypt, which would also be the date of the giving of the Ten Commandments.

 

It is widely accepted by academics and archeologists that Ramses II was the Pharaoh of the Exodus. This is based on findings in the important Canaanite city of Hazor, which is situated at the foot of the Galilee Mountains by the Hula Valley and which dominates the Via Maris, the main highway connecting Egypt to Mesopotamia, Syria and Anatolia. Evidence has been found in Hazor of a very significant conflagration in Hazor’s upper city, although not in the lower city. This accords with the biblical verse describing the destruction of Hazor during the Israelite conquest of Canaan:

​

They killed every soul that was there —by the edge of the sword were they utterly vanquished — not one soul remained. And he [Joshua] burned Hazor with fire (Joshua 11:11).

 

This is the only city explicitly mentioned in the Bible as being burned down during Joshua's northern campaign. Found in the rubble of this layer of burnt destruction was an Egyptian offering table with hieroglyphic writing indicating that it was dedicated by a high priest of Ramesses II. This conflagration has therefore been dated to the middle of the 13th century BCE, towards the end of the Late Bronze Age. Carbon-dating of grain storage also accords with this date. This all suggests that the Israelite invasion of Canaan should be dated to about 1250 BCE, during the reign of Rameses II.

​

Nevertheless, there are a number of problems with this conclusion. Archeology at Hazor indicates that following this conflagration there was no significant settlement in the city for the next 100 to 200 years, other than in the upper city where settlement was of a semi-nomadic nature and foundations were built only for tents and huts. This does not accord with the account in the Book of Judges of a recovery of Hazor. Strengthening of Hazor is described in Judges 4:2-3, when the king of Hazor comes into conflict with the Israelites at the time of the prophetess Deborah and her general Barak. It is possible, therefore, that the conflagration seen in Hazor is not from the time of Joshua, but from much later at the time of Deborah:

​

And Elohim subdued on that day Jabin the king of Canaan [and also the king of Hazor], before the children of Israel. And the hand of the children of Israel prevailed constantly harder against Jabin the king of Canaan until they had destroyed Jabin, king of Canaan (Judges 4:23-24).

 

A 13th century Exodus also does not accord with the dating of city wall destruction at Tel es-Sultan, the ancient fortified city of Jericho. The precise dating of this destruction is controversial, although all archeologists would agree that Jericho was deserted at the time of Rameses II because of a ban on the city declared by Joshua (Joshua 9:26), and that the wall destruction occurred much earlier. Based on the Canaanite pottery reported by Kathleen Kenyon, Bryant Wood has dated this destruction to about 1400 BCE in the Late Bronze Age.7

 

From the Bible, one can date the Exodus from Egypt to 1446 BCE (I Kings 6:1), knowing that Solomon began construction of his Temple in 966 BCE and this is the date I prefer to use (see also my essay “The Egyptian Exodus – fact or fiction”?) Entry into Canaan would have been 40 years later.

 

And it came to pass in the 480th year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the Lord (I Kings 6:1).

​

The proto-Sinaitic script evolved into the so-called proto-Canaanite script. A pertinent question, therefore, is whether this script is found in early Jewish settlement or early Canaanite settlements and how early this occurred.

​

The Lachish Ewer is a jug with an early alphabetic script written in ink near the neck of the jug that was found in Lachish, at one time an important Canaanite city. It is now in the British Museum. The Book of Joshua records that Lachish was conquered by the Israelites. It likely then became a Judahite city, although whether this happened immediately after the conquest or sometime after is unclear from the Bible (Joshua 10:31-32).

​

The inscription on the jug is fragmentary and difficult to interpret, but is believed to contain a personal name or dedicatory phrase. It was found in a Late Bronze Age II layer and is thought to date from the 15th to 14th century BCE. The pottery styles and associated artifacts in the same layer also match Egyptian and Canaanite pottery from that period. 

​

However, there are scholars who argue for a possible 14th century BCE date rather than 15th century due to stylistic variations in the script and the nature of surrounding pottery. Some suggest as late as the 13th century BCE.8

​

The Izbet Sartah Inscription is an early alphabetic inscription on a pottery ostracon (a potsherd) discovered in 1976 by Moshe Kochavi in Izbet Sartah, a small, Israelite, early Iron Age, rural settlement in central Israel near Tel Aphek and modern-day Rosh HaAyin. This village is thought to be the biblical Ebenezer (1 Samuel 4:1). The ostracon has been dated to approximately 1200 to 1100 BCE, placing it in Iron Age I, a time associated with early Israelite settlement. The inscription consists of several lines of text, with the final line believed to be an abecedary (a list of the letters of the alphabet in order). It was found in an undisturbed layer, and the ostracon matches the ceramic style of collared-rim storage jars and other early Iron Age pottery.

 

The site was only occupied for a short time, from the late 13th to early 11th century BCE, and was then abandoned. The 11th century BCE would therefore be the latest possible date for the script. If the identification with Ebenezer is correct, the abandoning of the site occurred in the late Judges period, when Eli was High Priest in Shilo and Samuel had just received his first revelation. The stratigraphic dating is fairly strong, although the lack of a continuous occupation at the site means the margin of error is around ± 50 years.

​

The Gezer Sherd was discovered in Tel Gezer by the Irish archaeologist R.A.S. Macalister during excavations at Tel Gezer, and is thought to be from the 10th century BCE, a period traditionally linked to the reign of King Solomon. Tel Gezer is in central Israel, near the modern city of Ramla, and it controlled a strategic position along the Via Maris. Gezer was a major Canaanite city-state until it was captured by the Egyptian Pharaoh, who slaughtered its Canaanite inhabitants, and then gave the city as a gift to his daughter when Solomon married her. The city would then have become Jewish-controlled:

Pharaoh king of Egypt had gone up, and conquered Gezer, and burnt it with fire, and slayed the Canaanites who inhabited the city, and given it for a gift to his daughter, Solomon’s wife. And Solomon built Gezer, and the lower Beth Horon (1 Kings 9:15-17).

 

The artifact is a small limestone sherd believed to be an agricultural calendar, and it lists the eight periods of agricultural activity in the year: two months of harvest, two months of planting, two months of late planting, one month of hoeing flax, one month of barley harvest, one month of measuring grain, two months of pruning vines, and one month of summer fruit.

​

Macalister's excavation methods were less precise than modern standards, which complicates absolute dating, and the 10th century BCE dating remains an estimate rather than an absolute certainty.

 

The Khirbet Qeiyafa Ostracon was discovered in 2008 at Khirbet Qeiyafa, a fortress above the Elah Valley. The site is dated to about 1000 to 975 BCE, corresponding to early Iron Age II, and therefore probably the time of King David. The inscription has been difficult to decipher completely due to the faded text and fragmentary condition. It may be a legal or ethical text, possibly related to social justice or governance. Suggested translations include words meaning "king," "judge," "servant," "do not oppress," and "God." It was found in a well-defined, sealed stratigraphic layer. Charcoal and olive pits found in the same stratigraphic layer as the ostracon underwent radiocarbon (C-14) dating, and the results yielded a date range of 1020–980 BCE (±30 years), aligning with the estimated time of King David’s reign. Pottery found in the same layer as the ostracon belonged to the Iron Age I–II transition period, specifically 1000–975 BCE. The combination of stratigraphy, radiocarbon dating, pottery analysis, and paleography makes the 1000–975 BCE date highly reliable.

​

A very relevant text to this discussion is found in the book of Judges, in that it indicates a degree of literacy in the general population at that time.

And he [Gideon] caught a young man of the men of Succoth, and questioned him; and he wrote down for him the princes of Succoth and its elders, seventy-seven men" (Judges 8:14).

 

Gideon would have lived sometime in the early Iron Age period.

 

To sum this all up, the proto-Sinaitic script was developed in Egypt as early as 1900 or 1800 BCE. It is unlikely that it was developed by Hebrews. However, it was sufficiently familiar to the Hebrew slaves that God was able to inscribe the Ten Commandments on two tablets of stone and Moses wrote a Book of the Covenant using this script. There is good evidence that at least by the 12th to 11th centuries BCE, at the time of the Judges, the Israelites were a literate or semi-literate society. Absence of evidence is not evidence, but there is no unequivocal evidence of Canaanite use of this script. The archaeological evidence, therefore, provides support for the hypothesis that it was the Israelites who brought this script into Canaan, although it does not prove it. Nevertheless, it makes little sense to suppose that a non-literate people such as the Canaanites were instrumental in disseminating this script and not the Israelites.

​

This also means that it was likely the Israelites who taught this script to the sea-bearing people, the Phoenicians.9 They in turn taught it to the Greeks, who were using this script by the 9th century BCE.

Unlike semitic languages, the Greek language requires vowels. For these vowels the Greeks used spare hieroglyphic letters that had sounds that were not needed. This included an ayin, which was used for the sound o. Ayin means an eye in Hebrew and its hieroglyph and proto-Sinaitic letter was a circle shaped like an eye.

​

The Jews changed from the proto-Sinaitic script to an Ashuri script when they were exiled to Babylon (586 BCE).10 This script is a form of the Aramaic alphabet, and was widely used in the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian empires. Over time, the Jews adapted the square Aramaic script, and this eventually replaced Paleo-Hebrew for religious and official writings.

 

The importance of the proto-Sinaitic script in the development of Judaism cannot be underestimated. One might even say that without this script, there would have been no Judaism. A transmission that remained entirely oral, or that was accompanied by no more than two tablets of the Covenant written in hieroglyphics that no one could read, could not have been the basis of this new faith. 

​

This will not be the last time that an advance in technology will have a significant impact on the spread of religion. This is true for both Judaism and the other monotheistic religions. The discovery of printing will allow the wide dissemination of the message of the Bible. The use of audio tapes will enable the promulgation of religious messages. The internet and programs such as zoom are now having a very significant impact on the spread of Jewish learning. 

​

The Jews have been an inventive people from the time of antiquity who brought advanced in both religion and technology to human progress. In reality, the need to be closely linked. Religion needs technology to be disseminated. Technology needs religion to be ethically controlled. These are some of the missions of the Jewish people in the 21st century.

​

References:

1. Hebrew did not need symbols for vowels, since it is built upon mainly three-lettered root letters. Once one knows the root of a Hebrew word and its conjugation, the reader can add in the appropriate vowels based on their knowledge of the language. There was therefore no necessity for symbols for vowels. The Masoretes were active roughly between the 6th and 10th centuries CE, primarily in Tiberias and Jerusalem in the Land of Israel, as well as in Babylonia, and they worked to preserve and standardize the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh). One of their main contributions included adding vocalization (Vowel Points). They developed a system of nikud to indicate vowel sounds, ensuring the correct pronunciation and reading of the text. Even today, most literature in Hebrew is written with consonants only, and the reader adds in the correct vowels.

2. Rollston, C. A. (2016). "The Early History of the Alphabet: The Proto-Sinaitic Inscriptions 2.0, Canaanite not Hebrew." Rollston Epigraphy and Rollston, C. A. (2020). "Scripture and Inscriptions: Eighth-Century Israel and Judah in Writing." In C. A. Rollston (Ed.), Writing and Literacy in the World of Ancient Israel: Epigraphic Evidence.

3. Goldwasser, O. (2006). "Canaanites Reading Hieroglyphs. Part I – Horus is Hathor? Part II – The Invention of the Alphabet in Sinai." Ägypten und Levante, 16, 121–160 and Goldwasser, O. (2011). "How the Alphabet Was Born from Hieroglyphs." Biblical Archaeology Review, 37(2), 40–53.

4. W. F. Albright, The Proto-Sinaitic Inscriptions and Their Decipherment (1949), Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (1973), John R Harris, The Hebrew Language (1891), Israel Finkelstein, and Neil Asher Silberman. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts (2001), and most recently Douglas Petrovich, The World’s Oldest Alphabet. Hebrew as the Language of the Proto-Consonantal Script, Carta Jerusalem, 2015.

5. Rashi to Genesis 13:15.

6. Rashi to Exodus 12:40 based on Mechilta, Megilla 9a.

7. John Garstang has argued that Jericho was destroyed around 1400 BCE, aligning with a biblical timeline. Garstang, John, and J. B. E. Garstang. The Story of Jericho. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1948. However, their conclusions were challenged by Kathleen Kenyon, who concluded that the walls of Jericho were destroyed around 1550 BCE, at the end of the Middle Bronze Age, likely by an Egyptian or natural event. She found no evidence of a walled city or significant occupation during the Late Bronze Age (1400–1200 BCE), the period traditionally associated with the Israelite conquest. Kenyon’s findings were challenged by Bryant Wood: “Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archeological Evidence” by Bryant Wood in Biblical Archeology Review March/April 1990.

8. Diringer, David. The Lachish Ewer: An Early Alphabetic Inscription Discovered at Tell ed-Duweir. London: Oxford University Press, 1941. However, other scholarship has debated whether it could be slightly later, possibly into the 13th century BCE. W. F. Albright initially leaned toward a 14th-century BCE date but later revised it to the 13th century BCE based on comparative analysis of early alphabetic inscriptions. William F. Albright. The Proto-Sinaitic Inscriptions and Their Decipherment. Harvard University Press, 1966. Also, Yariv Hacham's study, titled "The Lachish Ewer: A Pottery Ewer Dated to the 13th Century BCE with a Proto-Canaanite Inscription," is available as a PDF on Academia.edu. However, there is no indication that this study has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or as part of an academic volume, and it appears to be a standalone paper shared by the author on the platform.

9. A commonly held view is that the Jews borrowed their script (paleo-Hebrew) from the Phoenicians, since the two scripts are very similar. I feel it is more logical to assume that the Phoenicians picked up this script from the Israelites. 

10. There is an opinion in the Talmud that the Ten Commandments were written in the Assyrian script and that this was therefore the original writing of the Israelites. This script was then lost until it was reintroduced by Ezra in about 500 BCE.  However, this is not a unanimous opinion in the Talmud (TB Megilla 3 and TB Shabbat 104).  There is also no archeological evidence to support it. More likely, is that the Jews changed to an Assyrian script in the time of Ezra.  It is interesting that the Hebrew Assyrian script has a cuneiform stroke-like way of being written as would be anticipated given its Mesopotamian origins.