I went down a rabbit hole on the letter I mentioned and still have more to read about it before a proper reply (apparently there is considerable controversy about it which I hadn’t realized, my fault for trusting Wikipedia — some translated it as “no desire to write in Hebrew”, but then this was challenged persuasively to actually be “no ability” again, then there is controversy on whether by “Hebrew” they mean Hebrew proper or any Semitic script, then some say a Nabatean wrote it, but then this was recently challenged and so the author is again presumed to be a Jewish rebel, then someone even claims that Bar Khokba himself (!) wrote that letter, but this was an earlier hypothesis that apparently has been discarded…)
But just to rewrite what I intended to say: if one of the rebels under Bar Khokba did not have the ability to write in Hebrew/Aramaic (I think that is what the letter indicates), this is surprising information because you would expect a member of a fiercely nationalist resistance movement to be able to write in Hebrew/Aramaic.
The letter is here https://pub-f4993da6f0cd4d0a9c9cef073fa ... 541126.pdf
From “Recognizing Greek Literacy in Early Roman Documents from the Judaean Desert”,
Citing a number of examples, she argues convincingly […] translates "because of our inability (= we are unable) to write Hebrew (or Aramaic)."
From https://www.jstor.org/stable/24520162
Therefore, as far as Soumaios [[the writer of the letter]] is concerned, 'Eppasoti probably refers to Jewish script in general rather than Hebrew or Aramaic specifically.
Regarding an argument against the Nabatean hypothesis, from Michael Owen Wise: https://www.academia.edu/112155829/Lang ... w=34153790
Soumaios appears to be a hypocoristic of the name Samuel. Such was Ilan's analysis, and she listed nearly a dozen forms in support of it, spelled variously Zauoios, Zauaias, Zovucios, Leuaiov, 4202, 120, and *20 135 Samuel was not an uncommon Jewish name in Roman Judaea, according to that same onomastic expert. Twenty-six attested individuals bore the name in the centuries under review. 36 Thus, the hypocoristic Soumaios, while certainly compatible with the Nabatean hypothesis, is equally compatible with the notion of a Jewish writer of P. Yadin 52. The second possibility would seem far the more likely prima facie, given the demographics (it was, after all, a Jewish revolt) and the nationalist character of the conflict. Foreign commanders of Jewish troops? The idea that a perfervid rebel such as Masabala b. Simon would submit to military orders from a Nabatean-regarding a Jewish festival, moreover, hardly an ideologically neutral topic-seems incongruous.