EBOLI, PIETRO da: V. PIETRO DA EBOLI.
EBONE, Bishop of Reims. Educated at the Carolingian court, he was chaplain to Louis the Pious, by whom he was made bishop in 816.
The politics of this period may be compared to those of the Greek amphictyonies; the various groups found their common center in the sacred place where the Ark was kept. The first resting place of the Ark was Shiloh (Judg. 20:26; 1 Sam. 1:3); when this city was destroyed by the Philistines, the Ark was transferred to Nob. It is possible that not all the tribes were under the same leader, so that at times there would be a simultaneous existence of two "judges." The Judges (v.) were Othniel, Ehud (Ehdh), Shamgar, Barak with the prophetess Deborah (v.), Gideon, whose son attempted to found a monarchy at Shechem, Tola, Jair, Jephthah (v.), Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, and the popular hero Samson (v.).
The period that preludes the monarchical era ELIA (v.) and the prophet Samuel (v.). Samuel was initially opposed to the institution of monarchy, as it differed from the purely theocratic regime (1 Sam. 8:5, 18), but he eventually yielded to the will of part of the people, attracted by the example of neighboring monarchical peoples; the pressure exerted by the Philistines, inhabitants of the coast, favored the idea of concentrating national forces in a single hand.
Saul (v.), in whom the theocratic idea and monarchy both met and clashed. Saul’s observance of the law of the *hērem* (the sacred extermination of the enemy and the spoils of war) alienated him from the moral support of the prophet Samuel, and after Samuel’s death, the priestly class turned against him, while the bold figure of the young David loomed on the horizon. Saul was constantly engaged in fighting the Philistines, and on Mount Gilboa (v.) he sought voluntary death, unable to endure the disgrace of defeat or the loss of his sons. DAVIDE (v.) first became king of the tribe of Judah and only later of all Israel. He then conquered Jerusalem and transferred his residence there. He fought against the Philistines, the Ammonites, and the Arameans; after defeating the latter, he occupied their territory. Despite this, the Aramean Rezon organized guerrilla warfare and managed to have himself elected king of Damascus. David refined liturgical chant and composed psalms. Conflicts over his succession marred the final years of his reign; he had Solomon anointed as king.
Solomon (v. 971–931) had a peaceful reign. He opened the country to commerce and revealed to Hebrew thought the value of universal human experience; the sapiential literary genre thus came into being. Jerusalem took on the appearance of an international city and saw the construction of the Temple.
The division between north and south and the rise of two distinct kingdoms were determined primarily by two factors: material (the heavier taxation on the northern tribes) and moral (the occasional deviation of the Davidic monarchy from the strict Mosaic law, of which the priests of Shiloh considered themselves the guardians). At Solomon’s death, his son Rehoboam (933–917) succeeded him, recognized unanimously by the southern tribes, where the dynastic idea was stronger, while Jeroboam, son of Nebat, supported by the prophet Ahijah, who lived at Shiloh, was proclaimed king at Shechem; the northern tribes rallied around him. His kingdom became known as the Kingdom of Israel, with its capital first at Shechem and later (under Omri) at Samaria; Rehoboam’s kingdom was called the Kingdom of Judah, with its capital at Jerusalem. The northern kingdom soon abandoned monotheism for political reasons and reverted to Canaanite paganism, thereby losing the support of the prophets. Idolatrous infiltrations also occurred in Judah. Frequent disputes arose between the two kingdoms, which benefited the enemies of both and strengthened the Kingdom of Damascus.
Rehoboam was succeeded by his son Abijam (917–915), then by Asa (915–875); in Israel, after various succession struggles, Omri (887–885) ascended the throne. He settled accounts once and for all with the Philistines, curbed the encroachments of the Arameans of Damascus, and formed an alliance with the Phoenicians, an alliance that proved beneficial. He was succeeded by Ahab (875–853), who married Jezebel, daughter of the king of Tyre. He introduced full idolatrous worship, which provoked the reaction of the prophet Elijah (v.). Together with Jehoshaphat, king of Judah (885–851), despite the warnings of the prophet Micaiah (v.), he attacked Damascus and was killed in battle. Jehoshaphat later allied with the king of Israel Jehoram (852–843) against Moab, but again with adverse fortune. The dynasty of Omri, which had established Phoenician idolatrous worship in the land of Israel, ended in a horrific massacre orchestrated by a general named Jehu, who was anointed king by a prophet sent by Elisha (v.).
In the slaughter carried out by Jehu, the king of Judah, Ahaziah, son of Athaliah, former queen of Judah, also perished. Athaliah then took control of the government (843–837), introducing the religion of Tyre even in Judah; she killed all the males of the royal family. However, one of them escaped: the young Joash, who was proclaimed king (837–798) by the people, according to the plans of the high priest Jehoiada.
In Israel, Jehu soon lost favor with the puritan party, and under him and his son Jehoahaz (816–800), the kingdom fell into a state of decline.
In Judah, the scene was now dominated by the prophet Isaiah (v.). The pious king Hezekiah (720–692) sought to centralize worship in Jerusalem and purify it of idolatrous elements; contrary to Isaiah’s advice, he was swayed by the anti-Assyrian party, with the result that Judah found itself facing the army of Sennacherib, who had already defeated the Phoenician cities from Sidon to Acre, while Ammon, Edom, and Moab sought peace with him. Sennacherib, having encircled Jerusalem, suddenly withdrew by the work of a destroying angel (2 Kings 19:35). Judah nevertheless remained subject to Assyria. Despite this, Nahum (v.) and Zephaniah (v.) foresaw the fall of Nineveh: Egypt, which had been forced to abandon Memphis (671) and Thebes (666) to the conqueror, rebelled, while Assyria was engaged in Elam and threatened by the Medes. Nineveh fell in 612 under the blows of the Babylonians, Scythians, and Medes.
The Egyptian danger then arose before Judah. The pious king Josiah (d. 609) completed the reforms begun by Hezekiah and abrogated by his successor Manasseh (629–638); among the supporters of the restoration of pure Mosaic worship was Jeremiah. Josiah was mortally wounded at Megiddo, in a battle where the Judeans attempting to resist the Egyptian advance were defeated. The Egyptian threat, however, was short-lived: after the Egyptians were defeated at Carchemish (605) by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar and the Medes, the Babylonian threat arose instead. The policy of Judah oscillated between these two opposing poles: Babylon and Egypt. In 598, the pro-Egyptian faction prevailed, but Nebuchadnezzar himself appeared before the walls of Jerusalem; King Jehoiakim surrendered immediately. In 597, the first deportation to Babylon took place; among
EURE – The god Amon presents to the Pharaoh Sheshonq (Sheshonq I) a group of prisoners bound at the neck, each symbolizing a city of Palestine. Drawing of a bas-relief (20th century BC) from the Temple of Amon at Karnak (Thebes).
After the death of Joachaz in Israel, Joas was elected king (800-785), who broke off good relations with Judah and, during the reign of Amaziah (798-785), son of Joas of Judah, entered Jerusalem and stripped the Temple of its treasures.
From the reign of Uzziah of Judah (780-740) and Jeroboam II in Israel (785-745), a fifty-year period of peace began. The great powers, Assyria and Egypt, were in a period of reorganization, which heralded a great revival. Damascus weakened under repeated Assyrian blows. The period of peace brought great prosperity; culture spread, luxury increased, wealth was great but unevenly distributed, which provoked CAMOS (v.), Hosea (v.), Isaiah (v.).
In response to the awakening of the two great powers, two opposing parties developed in Syria-Palestine: the pro-Assyrian and the pro-Egyptian. When the latter reached its widest diffusion, a coalition of states (Israel, Damascus, Tyre, Sidon, several Philistine cities) formed and waged war on states inclined toward Assyria. The league’s army invaded Judea. The king of Judah, Ahaz (735-720), sought Assyria’s help; Damascus was subdued, and the kingdom of Israel experienced the first act of deportation to Assyria. Even the kingdom of Judah was practically a vassal of Assyria. In 722, after defeating proud Babylon (729), Assyria made Israel a province. A large number of notables were deported to Nineveh; from the foreign colonists transplanted by the conqueror to the region, a hybrid race arose: the Samaritans (v.), whose principal sanctuary was Bethel, and an Israelite priest taught the new arrivals the religion of Yahweh.
Among the deportees was the prophet Ezekiel (v.). Nebuchadnezzar placed Zedekiah on the throne of Judah. Despite Jeremiah’s warnings, Zedekiah allowed himself to be drawn into a coalition of states (Edom, Ammon, Moab, Tyre, and Sidon) against Babylon, and then came the end: in 587 Jerusalem was destroyed, its sacred vessels taken away, and the Temple burned. The Babylonian general who had conducted the campaign formed a community with the Jews who had been Babylon’s partisans; to them were added some Israelites from the northern kingdom. The governor of this community was Gedaliah (v.). But the king of Ammon had Gedaliah assassinated, and then the population—among them Jeremiah—fled to Egypt, where Jewish colonies had existed since Solomon’s time, established for commercial reasons.
In 539 Cyrus (v.) took Babylon and granted the Jews permission to return home. The territory assigned to them was very small: it included Jerusalem and its surroundings as far as Mizpah and Jericho to the north, Keilah, Beth-zur, and Tekoa to the south. At the head of the Jews was a governor, assisted by a council of elders.
Zerubbabel (v.), the second governor after the return, was urged by the prophet Haggai to rebuild the Temple and prepare to assume royal dignity, while the prophet Zechariah advised the election of two leaders. The rebuilding of the Temple began in 520 and was completed in 515. The conditions of the rebuilding were, however, very dire: poor harvests, locust plagues, heavy taxes impoverished the land, while Edom, Ammon, and the Samaritans, who inhabited the northern kingdom, looked on with ill will. The Babylonian community then sent the priest Ezra (v.), who arrived in Jerusalem in 458. What struck him most was the large number of mixed marriages, and he took action to abolish them in 458. The measure provoked great opposition, especially among the Samaritans. It was then that Ezra, fearing an attack, decided to rebuild the walls; but the governor of Samaria reported this to the Persian government, which ordered the destruction of what had been built. Nehemiah (v.) then asked to be sent to Jerusalem as governor (445). He encouraged the rebuilding of the walls and, together with Ezra, worked to ensure that the Torah truly permeated daily life and that worship was purified.
The Jews remained loyal to Persia until Alexander the Great passed through their territory (331). At Alexander’s death (323), his general commanding Egypt, Ptolemy, took Jerusalem without resistance on a Sabbath; another general, Seleucus, meanwhile occupied Babylon and Syria. Judea then passed to Antiochus III, who married Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy; after various vicissitudes, Antiochus was master of the territory by 200. Within the country, divisions persisted between supporters of Antiochus and those who favored Egypt, hoping for liberation; alongside the Hellenizers, open to new currents, were the pietists (Hasideans), guardians of the ancient religion and national civilization. When Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175-164), an admirer of Greek culture, came to rule Palestine, he was supported by the Hellenizers. He went further than they desired, however, imposing pagan Greek worship and suppressing the religion of Yahweh; on his return from a campaign in Egypt, he massacred the inhabitants of Jerusalem on a Sabbath and abandoned the city to plunder. In 168, the image of the “Lord of Heaven” was placed on the altar of Jerusalem, and the temple on Mount Gerizim was dedicated to Jupiter.
The Hellenizing party took refuge in a quietist stance, while active resistance was led by Judas Maccabeus, one of the five sons of Mattathias the Hasmonean. Judas organized the struggle and succeeded in occupying the Temple hill, which he found in deplorable condition; on the 25th of Kislev 165, its rededication (v.) took place. The governor Lysias, in agreement with the young prince Antiochus V (Eupator), granted religious freedom. The struggle did not cease, however: the Idumeans allied with the Hellenizing party, while the Nabateans sided with Judas; the Ammonites prepared to exterminate those Jews who had taken refuge in the fortress of Ramoth-gilead, but Simon Maccabeus achieved successes in Galilee. In 163, Lysias renewed the war against Judas, and Eleazar, the fourth of the Maccabees, died in battle; but in 162 Lysias and his royal ward had to give way to Demetrius I, son of Seleucus IV. He continued the war against Judas, but his general Nicanor was defeated. Judea was recognized as a Roman nation; despite this, Demetrius resumed the war with favorable results, and Judas Maccabeus fell in battle. The Jewish nationalists rallied around Jonathan, the youngest of the Hasmoneans, BALA (v.), a pretender to the throne against Demetrius. In Syria, discontented factions turned to Trypho, an officer of the king; he was initially friendly to Jonathan but later, out of jealousy, treacherously captured and killed him. The last of the brothers, Simon, entered negotiations with Demetrius, the legitimate king of Syria, who granted him independence (142). Simon was appointed prince, general, and high priest for life. He renewed the treaty of friendship with Rome, and his reign was a happy period for the people. But soon the king of Syria changed policy, and war broke out again; Simon was treacherously killed (135), along with his wife and sons, by his son-in-law Ptolemy (v. Maccabees). From 135 to 63 B.C., Palestine was ruled by the Hasmonean dynasty (v.): John Hyrcanus I (134-104), Aristobulus I (104-103), Alexander Jannaeus (103-76), Alexandra Salome (76-67), Aristobulus II (67-63). In 63 Pompey subjected Judea to Rome. Through the cunning intrigues of Antipater (an Idumean), his son Herod the Great (35-4 B.C.) obtained the royal power granted him by the Romans, to whom he bowed servilely, pursuing a program of Hellenistic culture that sometimes troubled Jewish consciences.
From as early as 722 B.C., and especially after the Babylonian exile (6th century B.C.), Israel was reduced to the single tribe of Judah; the Israelites therefore called themselves “Jews” (Jer. 40, 11-15; 44, 26; Zach. 8, 23; Eyth. 2, 5; 3, 6; 9, 29, etc.; Esd. 4, 12, etc.; Neh. 4, 2; 5, 17; 6, 6, etc.; very often in 1-2 Mach. and in the New Testament).
After the death of Herod the Great, Roman authority over the Jews was exercised through procurators (v.) and also through Herod’s various descendants (v. ANTIPAS, AGRIPPA I and II).
With the rise of Christianity there arose the opposition between the Pharisees (v.) and the leaders of the people (v. SADDUCEES) on the one hand, and the teaching of Jesus on the other, chiefly with regard to the interpretation of messianic hope (v. MESSIAH) and the antiquity of the Mosaic law (v.). The Apostles, and especially St Paul, completed the process of separation between Christianity and Judaism by excluding circumcision and the Law and by the admission of Gentiles (v.), which had been initiated by Peter (v. CORNELIUS THE CENTURION), later confirmed by the Council of Jerusalem (v.) and vindicated by St Paul against the Judaizers (v.), especially in Galatians (v.).
From 66 to 70 A.D. the Jewish War took place, which marked the end of the political unity of the Jews, unless one wishes to extend this until the messianic rising of Bar Kokhba (v.). The destruction of the single Temple of Jerusalem in the year 70 brought the priesthood and the sacrificial cult to an end. Study of the Law, however, which had already been honored after the Babylonian exile by the scribes (v.), now found its centre in the synagogues (v.). Since the entire people after 70 was Diaspora (v.), the synagogue, with its reading and study of the Law, became the only visible religious bond among the Jews. The rabbinic age (of masters) began. The principal initiators of this new spiritual phase of Israel were R. Jóhánan ben Zakkaj, R. ‘Aqibá’ and the tannaim (v.). The fruit of the tannaim’s work is the Mishnah (v.), compiled by R. Jéhúdháh the Holy, which sets forth mainly, citing the masters, the legal doctrine (halakhah, v.), while the moral-exhortatory part is gathered in the midrashim (v. MIDRASH). The commentaries on the Mishnaic text by later masters (3rd-5th centuries), the Amoraim (v.), form the Gemara; the union of the Gemara Talmud (v.).
After the “generations” of the western and eastern Amoraim had come to an end, the Saboraim (v.) succeeded them, while the masters carried on critical work on the biblical text. From the 8th century the succession of the Gemara teachers determined the cultural and social guidance of the Jews in the midst of the Arab world. Of supreme importance was then Moses Maimonides (v. 1135-1204), who resolved the religious doubts that had arisen through Jewish-Arab philosophical speculation and formulated the 13 articles of faith (“iqqarim”). More than the great examples, however, the “decisors” were important for the life of the people. A synthetic collection of the ritual and legal tradition of the preceding centuries is in the 15th century the Shulchan Arukh of Joseph Caro.
From the very flourishing period of their activity under the humanized caliphs of Córdoba, and especially under ‘Abd ar-Rahmán III, the Jews came to be divided into two groups: the Sephardim and the Ashkenazim (v. ASHKENAZ), with some distinctive traditions in rites and customs.
Opposing currents to the Pharisaic-rabbinic tradition appeared in the Karaites, who established themselves even among the Khazars, whose king converted to Judaism in 1140. They also produced eminent examples.
The origins of the Kabbalah (v.), which flourished in the Middle Ages, seem to be more ancient. In the 16th century Isaac Luria gave it new vigour, which manifested itself, among other things, in the various messianic explosions of David Reubeni, Shabbetai Zevi and Jacob Frank.
With Moses Mendelssohn there began openly the “liberal” tendency within Judaism, which began to emerge from its traditional isolation and tended to assimilate with the Gentiles. At the same time, however, there arose in opposition the tendency of the Hasidim (v.), especially in the communities of Eastern Europe. The “camp” of emancipation, officially granted to the Jews in 1791 during the French Revolution, favoured assimilation and thus liberalism and modernism. Modern and liberal Jews follow the traditions of their people from a more national than doctrinal point of view. One might also speak of a division with regard to Zionism (v.), though this has today been reduced with the establishment of the State of Israel, which at least symbolically remedies the exile (galuth).
Antonino Romeo
II. LANGUAGE
Before the Christian era the Hebrew language is represented by the Bible and by rare extra-biblical texts; it is not exhausted in Biblical Hebrew. Indeed, Biblical Hebrew, that is, the complex of Hebrew texts which have come down to us in the Masoretic Bible, represents only one stage of that language, owing to a “planning” of the language to which the biblical texts were subjected over the centuries down to the time of the Masoretes (v. MASORA AND MASORETES, 8th-10th centuries A.D).
It was a curious opinion of rabbis and some Fathers of the Church that the Hebrew language was the language of primitive humanity; from it the other languages were derived. Today, however, it is known that Hebrew has its place in the western Semitic group; it is the development of the Canaanite language spoken by the Semites who before the Israelites occupied Palestine.
The first Canaan (v.) are known from the so-called Canaanite glosses contained in the letters of Amarna, from the abundant linguistic material discovered at Ras Shamra, from other Phoenician inscriptions, and from the great inscription recently discovered at Karatepe (though only of the 14th-8th centuries B.C.).
Amarna (v.), directed by Phoenician and Palestinian princes to the Pharaohs Amenophis III and IV (15th century B.C.), add to their Babylonian text explanations (glosses) in the language of the country. These glosses are precious documents revealing the forms which underlie Biblical Hebrew. Thus, for example, the gloss yazkur (letter 228, 19) represents the primitive form of the Hebrew yizkor, which is reached by a process common in Biblical Hebrew of dealing with primitive short vowels.
Ras Shamra (v.) also provides notable indications of the stage (15th-14th centuries B.C.) of the Canaanite-Phoenician language in pre-Israelite times. In these texts, for example, there is a significant use of the so-called inverted tenses, which constitute such a characteristic feature of Biblical Hebrew syntax.
From these findings it may be deduced that the Hebrew language was not introduced by the Israelites when they occupied the land of Canaan, but already existed there beforehand. If one were to hazard a hypothesis about the language spoken by the Israelites at that time, one might think of Aramaic (perhaps with a hint in Deut. 26:5: "A wandering Aramean was my father"), since the Israelite offering first-fruits to the Lord would say: cf. also Gen. 31:20-24, 47) or else Amorite (an eastern Canaanite dialect, best known from the texts of Mari [v.]). It is not unknown in the history of peoples that an invading people, even while suppressing the native population, inherits its language. This would have happened to the Israelites. On entering the land of Canaan they evidently gradually adopted the pre-existing language, and with the contribution of their own linguistic treasure transformed the Canaanite tongue into Proto-Hebrew. This Proto-Hebrew, a typical result of linguistic mixing in which Canaanite was the dominant element (so much so that Isa. 19:18 could speak of "the language of Canaan"), developed over the following centuries. Yet little material survives to trace this development. Extrabiblical texts are very few (the Siloam inscription, the Moabite Stone, the Lachish letters, and other brief documents). Now these texts, which date from roughly the golden age of Hebrew prose (9th–6th cent. B.C.), show no notable differences from Biblical Hebrew; this applies especially to the Lachish letters, contemporary with the prophet Jeremiah. It is clear, however, that pronunciation and vocalization often differed from that fixed by the scribes, and that within the same linguistic period there were dialectal variations (cf. *ṣibbōrēh* and *ṣibbōrēh*, Judg. 12:6); the relative pronoun in the north was *fe-*, while in the south it was *’ašer*.
Among the characteristics of this language at least the following should be noted: 1) in phonetics, the long Proto-Semitic *ā* is rendered in Hebrew by a long *ā* (Arabic *salām* = Heb. *šālôm*); 2) in morphology: the masculine plural ending is *-īm* (whereas in Aramaic and Arabic, and even in the Moabite Stone, it is *-īm*); 3) in syntax: the classical use of “inverted” tenses, whereby a narrative of past events begins with what is called the perfect and continues with forms that outwardly look like futures but are meant as perfects; conversely, a narrative of future events begins with a future and continues with what appears to be a perfect.
The spoken Hebrew language suffered a mortal blow from the events of the Babylonian exile (6th–5th cent. B.C.). On their return, the slow process of transition to Aramaic had already begun. Yet the Hebrew of the sacred texts remained in weekly readings and liturgical recitations. Around this Hebrew (which, for its preservation, may be compared to the Latin of the Roman liturgy) all the care of scribes, and later of rabbis in the Christian era, was lavished. The “planning,” i.e., the conscious or unconscious linguistic adaptation of texts, especially the oldest ones, to current usage, reached its final and definitive act in the scribal vocalization (v.). The Tiberian vocalization enjoys the highest authority, yet it represents only one branch of the linguistic tradition, namely the Tiberian. It is well known that other traditions existed, such as the Babylonian, with its own system of vocalization, and the Palestinian; witnesses to these different traditions are also the Greek version of the Septuagint (in its transliterations) and St. Jerome.
When one examines the characteristics and degrees of linguistic planning as it appears in the Masoretic text, one observes that in dealing with the sacred text the aim seems to have been to attune it to the speech of Jerusalem. Considering the very long historical period over which the various books of the Bible were written, one notes: 1) the greatest uniformity in vocalization (hence the greatest planning intervention); followed in descending order of uniformity by: 2) consonantal variations; 3) morphological variations; 4) syntactical variations; 5) lexicographical variations. For example: the construct plural of *ṣibbōrēh* from Mosaic writings down to the last biblical book is given as *dibbērē*; yet we know from St. Jerome that in his day the form *dabbērē* was still in use.
After Hebrew ceased to be a living language, it continued to be cultivated by scholars. Works intended for the educated class were composed in a language meant to imitate the classical Hebrew of the Bible. Thus there arose (perhaps still under the influence of the spoken language?) the collection of writings containing the extra-biblical religious code: the Mishnah, the Tosefta (a collation of traditions not preserved in the Mishnah), and other texts. This is Rabbinic Hebrew, whose tendency is to reproduce Biblical Hebrew; yet it contains many Aramaisms, Graecisms, and Latinisms. Grammatically, it suffices to note that the “inverted” tenses are no longer used, the masculine plural ending is *-īm* (no longer *-īm*), and a *mitpa‘ēl* form appears (instead of the Biblical *hitpa‘ēl*).
In the Middle Ages Rabbinic Hebrew underwent considerable development; of this long period noteworthy works by rabbis include liturgical poetry (called *piyyuṭ* from Greek *poiētēs*), scientific treatises, and especially philosophical ones. It was in this period that Hebrew grammar and lexicography were created (v. *diqduq*). Indeed, Judah ben David Hayyuj discovered the triliteral root in Hebrew; the Kimchi family, eminent philologists of the 11th century, followed in his footsteps.
From this Hebrew language, so lovingly cultivated, there finally arose Neo-Hebrew.
The Zionist movement, which has today led to the establishment of the State of Israel, had to confront the question of a common language to be imposed on Jews who are “ascending” (the word they use for immigrants) from all parts of the world and speak different languages. They turned back to the language of their fathers: Hebrew. Yet since Hebrew had been a dead language for two millennia, it was necessary to adapt it to the needs of modern civilization. The imposing work of Eliezer Ben Yehuda (b. 1858–d. 1922), an Odessa Jew, with his vast *Thesaurus totius Hebraeicis* (Berlin 1908 ff.), bent the idiom of the Bible to the needs of the 20th century. And so today one can say in Hebrew “electric light,” “radio,” “aviation,” etc. In this way a new and fruitful period is opening for the Hebrew language, now alive once more. Hebrew literary activity is now considerable, with scientific publications (centered especially at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) and popular works in Tel Aviv.
More accessible grammars: J. Touzard, *Grammaire hébraïque abrégée*, Paris 1905, new abridged ed. by A. Robert, 1949; I. Pizzi, *Elementa grammaticae hebraicae*, Turin 1900; F. Serbo, *Grammatica della lingua ebraica*, Florence 1909; P. Joüon, *Grammaire de l’hébreu biblique*, Rome 1923, reprint 1947 (especially good for syntax). On post-war Hebrew literature: U. Cassuto, *Storia della letteratura ebraica postbellica*, Florence 1938.