Sefer Tagin—Olde Face, Slab-Serifs and Semi-Ligatures. Covenantal warnings and reassurance. Re-housing the Temple within the Torah.

This PhD assesses the form and function of Sefer Tagin, a manual for scribes that addresses special forms of letters to be written in the Sefer Torah, and the specific instances where these occur. This is thought to be a medieval Geonic work with kabbalistic (mystical) overtones. However, my hypothesis and research show that this work was written earlier, primarily because it is describing forms that relate to the Tannaitic (late and post Herodian) period, most likely between 70 and 200 C.E. The three main causes of these special forms are preservation of archaic or older forms, semi-cursivity, preservation of archaic forms, and deliberate and specific ornamentation. Sometimes these occur in combination. Regarding ornamentation specifically, the recognition of tagin as the collective noun for any protrusion from the monoline form of a letter was key, as was the identification of the single qarnaʾ (horn) form, the bi-partite qarney (horn/horns of) and the tri-partite ziyyunin (weapons/armaments). These forms helped to migrate the worship in the Temple into the very writing of a scroll, when reading Torah replaced the Temple service, as the focus of Jewish ritual. Additionally, the words and phrases listed by letter are not random. They show patterns that reflect certain overall themes, often related to that letter form. In effect, a visual midrash highlighting covenantal concerns after the destruction of the Second Temple. The themes presented by the instances are either positive (the promises and fulfilment of covenant through the generations, blessings, righteous behaviour, the Temple) or negative (sin and punishment, namely idolatry; following the nations; murder/consuming blood; and inappropriate sexual behaviour). This reflects a struggle with theodicy, the feeling by the author that the people of Judaea were being punished for forsaking God, though balanced by the reassurance of the promise that the berit (covenant) still held. This echoes the Deuteronomic dichotomy of the blessings and curses playing out, depending on Israel’s behaviour. Significantly, because later halakhic authorities reframed the work by combining it with other Masoretic listings in paraša format, the lists of instances were corrupted more than would likely be normal over time. Additionally, this shift meant that the interpretation of the letter forms became divorced from the original descriptor. In turn, scribes developed some extreme forms unworkable according to modern stricter scribal halakhic standards. Thus, Sefer Tagin has largely been abandoned in modern scribal practice. Understanding the form and function reframes the work against the author’s original intention. This can help guide future generations of scribes who might wish to embrace this tradition in a practical way, and hopefully re-energise it.

Name dc:type.qualificationname

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Level dc:type.qualificationlevel

Doctoral

Grantor dc:publisher.institution

University of Cambridge

Year dc:date.issued

2024

Author dc:creator

• Michaels, Marc

Advisors dc:contributor.advisor

• Khan, Geoffrey
• Outhwaite, Ben

• Sefer Tagin
• Scribe
• Sofrut
• Hebrew Letters
• Tagin
• Otiyyot Meshunnot
• Torah Decorations
• Dead Sea Scrolls
• Hebrew Manuscripts

Licence

• https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/bitstreams/62749208-169d-418d-bb7b-2fa1433e32e3/download
• http://purl.org/NET/rdflicense/allrightsreserved

Language dc:language

eng

DOI dc:identifier.doi

https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.117276

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:www.repository.cam.ac.uk:1810/382482