> > Item 1, I think we'd agree, is just wrong. Item 2 is probably true. But > > is it enough to refer to square Hebrew as "the modern form" of > > Phoenician (Old Canaanite, whatever you want to call it)? > > Well, one of the two modern forms, Samaritan being the other.
Ah, so the next protracted debate is going to be whether Samaritan should also be encoded using the existing square Hebrew characters. Since it would appear that the argument for unification of PH with Hebrew could also argue for unification of PH with Samaritan, or of all three. Peter Constable
