Video Upload Options

References

1. Panammuwa II and Bar-Rakib: Two Structural Analyses, K. Lawson Younger, Jr., University of Sheffield http://www.jtsa.edu/Documents/pagedocs/JANES/1986%2018/Younger18.pdf
2. Bae, Chul-hyun (2004). "Aramaic as a Lingua Franca During the Persian Empire (538-333 B.C.E.)". doi:10.22425/jul.2004.5.1.1. http://www.sejongjul.org/archive/view_article?pid=jul-5-1-1. 
3. See Porten, Bezalel; Yardeni, Ada (1999). Textbook of Aramaic documents from ancient Egypt: Ostraca & assorted inscriptions. Hebrew University, Dept. of the History of the Jewish People. ISBN 978-965-350-089-1. https://books.google.com/books?id=T1wPAQAAMAAJ.  and "Aramaic – Examples of writing" (in en). http://lila.sns.it/mnamon/index.php?page=Esempi&id=2&lang=en&PHPSESSID=fpxoeogttmuhz . The stele is known as KAI 269. Maurice Pope writes, The story begins just before the century opened. In 1692 a long band of material from a mummy burial was unwrapped in the presence of M. de Maillet, the French Consul in Cairo. It carried figures drawn in the ancient Egyptian style which were accompanied by an ink-written text in a hitherto unknown sort of writing. It was cut up, presumably at the time of unwrapping, into seven or eight pieces, and sent to France. One of the pieces came to the notice of Jean-Pierre Rigord, a collector of antiquities, who discussed the find in the Memoires de Trevoux of June 1704. Rigord's article was illustrated with plates of an ordinary hieroglyphic inscription, a specimen of the mummy text, and another stone inscription from Egypt from his collection. With the aid of the passage about Egyptian writing in Clement, he identified the first as 'symbolical hieroglyphic', the second as either 'hieratic' or as 'cyriological hieroglyphic', and the third as 'epistolographic'. He thought that this last one, written from right to left, was probably Phoenician. The script was said to have been in public use, and Phoenician might have come in as a mercantile language with the Shepherd Kings. The divergence of the language from Hebrew (the original tongue of mankind) had obviously reached the point of unintelligibility in Joseph's day for an interpreter to have been considered necessary between him and his brothers, and Jerome had said that Phoenician was half-way between Hebrew and Egyptian. Finally, Rigord suggested that the language might have been the same as Punic.
4. Aramaic at Encyclopædia Iranica http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/aramaic-
5. Frye, Richard N.; Driver, G. R. (1955). "Review of G. R. Driver's "Aramaic Documents of the Fifth Century B. C."". Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 18 (3/4): 456–461. doi:10.2307/2718444.  p. 457. https://dx.doi.org/10.2307%2F2718444
6. Geiger, Wilhelm; Kuhn, Ernst (2002). Grundriss der iranischen Philologie: Band I. Abteilung 1. Boston: Adamant. pp. 249ff. 
7. Stolper, John A. Matthew (2007). "What are the Persepolis Fortification Tablets?". The Oriental Studies News & Notes (winter): 6–9. Archived from the original on 14 February 2007. https://web.archive.org/web/20070214035646/http://persepolistablets.blogspot.com/2007/01/what-are-persepolis-fortication.html. Retrieved 2007-02-13. 
8. Naveh, Joseph; Shaked, Shaul (2006). Joseph Naveh. ed. Ancient Aramaic Documents from Bactria. Studies in the Khalili Collection. Oxford: Khalili Collections. ISBN 978-1874780748. 
9. Beyer. p. 28 n. 27; Wiesehöfer, Josef; Azodi, Azizeh. Ancient Persia. pp. 118–20. 
10. "Iranian Scripts for Aramaic Languages," in the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 341 (2006), pp. 53-62.