Tartaria tablets, advanced research. (Latest). Answers to allmost possible questions.

October 31, 2019

Tartaria tablets, latest advanced research. Answers to allmost possible questions.

Picture,from https://www.descopera.ro/stiinta/3343280-misterele-tablitelor-de-la-tartaria

Map from https://cersipamantromanesc.wordpress.com/2014/07/30/adevarata-istorie-a-descendentei-noastre/

Image result for tartaria alba harta Tartaria village, Alba County

Only three important, crucial issues have been  in the attention of researchers, during decades since discovery of the tablets in ’61, until today.

N.Vlassa , chief in charge at the archaeological diggings. supposed discoverer .               His picture from https://actualdecluj.ro/semnificatia-tablitelor-de-la-tartaria-muzeul-de-istorie-din-cluj-detine-cele-mai-vechi-scrieri-din-istoria-civilizatiei/

Image result for nicolae vlassa arheologul

Image result for tartaria tablets arheologie.ulbsibiu.ro Tartaria groapa Luncii from arheologie.ulbsibiu.ro

But also the same questions still surrounded by mistery, and interesting the audience at the highest level:                                                                                                                            1.real age  2. Genuine?  3. Whether or not carry a form of writing.                                       The answers to these questions will be, each of them detailed and almost dissected, and  have been the result of more than 10 years of dedicated research. Into the field of birth and followed by the evolution of writing in the world, various world writing systems, and then the comparative study customized and applied to Tartaria tablets (Tartaria tablets=TT)

1. Are TT as old as spoken/rumors ?

Various researchers have advanced different ages.There is no convergence of opinions. Their discoverer, N.Vlassa told of about 2.700 B.C. Then others went up to 5.300 B.C. (e.g. M.Merlini).                                                                                                                                             The age of 5.300 BC after me is completely out of  question, and the 2.400-2.700 BC is the maximum extreme theoretical! limit from which I can discuss after my humble opinion. I Will explain the reasons why even this latter age is not possible.

2.What are the arguments of most researchers for these TT ages (after me unrealistic)?

For 5,300 BC :                                                                                                                                          – the alleged finding of the tablets in the layer corresponding to the civilization of Vinca and the age same as of the bones (5,300 BC/C14) assumed to be found in the immediate vicinity. Image, from https://www.thelivingmoon.com/46ats_members/Lisa2012/03files/Tartaria_Tablets.html

Image result for tartaria bones Tartaria Groapa Luncii, female bones dated 5.300 B.C.

At present, very few researchers are still claiming such an old age.                                     For 2400-2700 BC :                                                                                                                               – possible fallen down from above strata, so origin from newer layers (and hence the membership of artefacts to crops such as Cotofeni? Baden? Petresti?) and                          – related assessments of some artifacts found in the immediate proximity of TT, as pertaining to later cultures than Vinca A-C, as well as                                                                   – judgments and comparisons generally related to the time of appearance, and the evolution of writing in the world.

From https://alba24.ro/autenticitatea-tablitelor-cu-semne-pictografice-de-la-tartaria-enigma-pentru-unii-istorici-ce-spune-arheologul-horia-ciugudean-care-in-1989-a-participat-la-sapaturi-400800.html  :

Image result for tartaria groapa luncii Artefacts found alegedly with the tablets,

Image, from  https://fashiondocbox.com/90885882-Jewelry/Tartaria-and-the-sacred-tablets.html

Image result for  tartaria groapa luncii Tartaria-Groapa Luncii (the very site where tablets were found)

3.Were TT in that layer (VINCA) ? Were the tablets near the bones?

It is not known for sure;
“there are no photos or sketches, blueprints of the exact location of each artifact, and much more,

  • – Not known who were present/ all the persons close to the moment of discovery,        – where exactly were every of them, or walked in the ritual complex, when and how much time some missed (eg. Vlassa some hours)                                                           – Who was the very person who first saw or found TT                                                      – In fact who first touched them is not known.                                                                   – When, who gathered, packed the artefacts and transported to museum , when and to whom were given, where in the museum were put ?

In conclusion, there are no witnesses and no hard evidence of where exactly where every artefact/item including TT were placed or were found in the entire religious complex.                                                                                                                                               AS A RESULT, I HAVE ANY ASSISTANCE AND CANNOT RELY ON ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING THE PLACE AND MOMENT OF DISCOVERY, AND THE SAME ON ESTIMATED AGE, REMAINING FOR ME THE SINGLE OPTION, THAT OF ANALISING THE SIGNS !

4.  There is available a scientific method of measuring their age exactly?

Their Age cannot be determined with any of the current methods. Worse not anymore, as the tablets have been baked in an owen (who has decided at an unknown temperature is not known) apparent, immediately after discovery, because they seemed to be friable.                                                                                                                                       (Not to be enough, before  chemical structure was changed , as were impregnated with nitrolack !)

5.Could be TT genuine  sumerian or how much could be related to the early stage of the sumerian handwriting?

There are not a sumerian, it is absolutely certain.                                                                          Top researchers in the proto-writing field said that although the signs are similar to the sumerian proto-cuneiform (proto-writing stage), the signs and writing are not authentic/genuine sumerian.                                                                                                              These researchers only mentioned these similarities and differencies in the passage and in a superficial way.                                                                                                                              I went into more detail and explained that the signs are similar in shape reflected only as blueprints, schematic way/sketch the proto-sumerian signs, but they have no their counterpart concrete shape.                                                                                                       Researchers shows shortcomings, they have                                                                                 – not identified all the signs, and they have                                                                                      – misidentified others. (Ex A. Vaiman, R.Kolev and others).                                                                                                                                                                                                                              The resemblance is due to the filogenesis of the writing in general. That is, the connection and the ultimate sumerian origin and transmission of the signs and in fact of many writing systems used in the Near East and in the Aegean area. Such a filiation, apart from the one noted by researchers I.Papakitsos and G. Kenanidis (relative to the Aegean proto-linear writing) is supported and explained by me and in addition and sometimes more detailed. However, I did not think of some assyrologists and specialists in sumerian proto-writing/proto-cuneiform (e.g. Falkenstein, A. Vaiman, R.Kolev) to approach a sumerian interpretation as long as they claim that signs are not proper/really sumerian?

From The Origins of Writing as a Problem of Historical Epistemology                 Peter Damerow https://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlj/2006/cdlj2006_001.html

figure1

<<…. early writing systems seems to indicate, as Ignaz Gelb has pointed out in his famous Study of Writing (Gelb 1952: 212-220), that the idea spread in various directions at the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC from centers in Mesopotamia and Egypt. Proto-Elamite writing occurs only a short time after proto-cuneiform. It was used for a short period in vast areas of the Iranian plateau. In the second half of the 3rd millennium BC, writing is attested as far to the north as Ebla in Syria and to the east as the Indus culture in modern Pakistan. Minoan writing starts at Crete around the turn of the 3rd to the 2nd millennium BC. At that time, cuneiform writing is also attested further north in the regions of Anatolia.>>

                                                                                                                                                                   6. What examples could be given  to support the fact that TT are not genuine sumerian ones ?

  • Always the sumerian signs/marks for numbers (with the apparent  D-letter shape) in the Sumer were made by imprinting, but ours are made by tracing/scratching.
  • Sumerian numbers : from https://sites.utexas.edu/dsb/tokens/the-evolution-of-writing/
  • Image result for sumerian 3.200 proto writing numbers (Fig. 2) Impressed tablet featuring an account of grain, from Godin Tepe, Iran (Courtesy Dr. T. Cuyler Young, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto)
  • Image result for proto-cuneiform Proto-cuneiform tablet (W 9578,g) from Uruk IV, 3350-3200 BC …
  • Only D-shaped proto-cuneiform sumerian NINDA/”bread” sign was traced/scraped. (on the right).                                                                                          Image from https://ro.pinterest.com/pin/488640628318570008/?lp=true
  • Image result for proto-cuneiform school tabletImage result for borger ud.unug proto-cuneiform
  •                                                                                                                                                     (We have on TT first D-sign on round TT very close to it, but not the same.            Image from http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html                         
  • Image result for living moon tartaria)
  • Very many signs though reflecting by general way the shape of the sumerian proto-cuneiform ones, in fact their concrete and exact shape is much more like those that were later used in the Anatolian, Aegean (and even many in the Mediterranean) writings. As well as in the Near East (canaanite, phoenician).                 
  • IT IS A FACT THAT WAS NOT NOTICED NOt A WORD, BY ANY SCIENTIST, (ONLY BY ME) THAT:                                                                                                                                      – MANY SIGNS ON THE ROUND TABLET IS REFLECTING AN EVOLUTION, (CHANGED SHAPES THAN PROTO-CUNEIFORM), REFLECTING A LATER PERIOD OF TIME                                                                                                                                      One example:    Image result for moonlight tartaria     picture from  http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html                                                                                                                        The H-like sign (on the round tablet with 3 horizontal bars) looks much more like, and even is exactly the same as the folowing:                                                                          – the Heth sign from canaanite writing/1.500-1.200 BC,                                                    – the Pa3 sign from the Aegean/2.000-1.500 BC,                                                                     – the archaic ETA/Heta sign from the archaic Greek/ 800-500BC (apparent crooked-looking due of offset vertical bars). But the sign is actually further present throughout  Mediterranean. Only one sign is identical to that of proto-cuneiform, the sign +++++++, the sumerian ‘As’ and another is approaching (the 1-st D), the sumeria sign “Sur“.

The Sumerians, during any period, used a uniform writing corresponding to the time during which the scribe was living. They did not use pictograms and ideographic signs on separate tablets at/in a given time.

7. The shape of clay TT is very important?

I don’t think it is. Image from https://www2.uned.es/geo-1-historia-antigua-universal/ESCRITURAS_ANTIGUA/Escrituras_3__antiguas_BALKAN_DANUBE-SCRIPT.htm

 Clay disc from Vinca, Serbia

Otherwise I know more examples  round tablets.                                                                  Sumerian star map, from                                                                                 https://curiosmos.com/this-5500-year-old-sumerian-star-map-recorded-the-impact-of-a-massive-asteroid/

Image result for sumerian star chart

and none sumerian ones with a hole. Then the Cretan tablets with the hole, but not perfectly round-shaped.

 Linear Script A/ http://arthistoryresources.net/greek-art-archaeology-2016/minoan-outline.html , and round ball:

 Cypro-Minoan clay ball in Louvre, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypro-Minoan_syllabary

Folowing Karanovo tablet http://institutet-science.com/sakralna-plochica-karanovo/?lang=en

Image result for karanovo tablet

Another round tablet & holes, from Tartaria : https://adevarul.ro/locale/alba-iulia/tablita-secreta-tartaria-contine-obiectul-arheologic-descoperit-2014-semnele-erau-ascunse-privitorilor-1_57fcfa425ab6550cb876646f/index.html

Image result for tartaria tablet

Then the discussion about how flat or swelling/bulged are some or others do not see to be much productive.

 8. Are the TT genuine ?

YES. (More so yes than no! )                                                                                                                ( partly No, because it does not seem to be the result of a one’s intention to communicate by writing something connected with a particular economic or religious necessity.)

Yes, because the one who wrote them didn’t intended to fool somebody and whatever intented (we do not know what), the scribe was fair intended. It seems he wanted rather to practice the evolution of  writing or to show someone the same evolution and basic principles of writing.                                                                                                                     Maybe at the best succeded to write a short ritualic formula or short written economical token.

9. If the “writer” intended to show the evolution and writing principles, could be like/kind ofsumerian-like school scribal tablets ?

Definitely no. Because school scribal tablets:                                                                                  – put youngsters to copy teacher’s texts,                                                                                         – to divide tablets in writing sectors, and                                                                                    – were quite repetitive in content, as containing lexical lists, eg. of things, ocupations, etc.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         From The tablet House: a scribal school in old Babylonian Nippur Eleanor Robson https://www.cairn.info/revue-d-assyriologie-2001-1-page-39.htm#

  • Types of school scribe, writing-learning tablets:

Table 1

Table 3 The order of the elementary curriculum in House F[20]
Table 3
tableau im13

10. What is the point, or why there are 3 tablets together?

The question can be asked because if you have something to say, you write everything on a tablet and  not spreading the message in three different places. Or at least write using the same writing system.                                                                                                 The answer is that he wanted to show the evolution of the writing from icons to ideograms, and even to some extent to syllables and letters.                                          We have                                                                                                                                                   – a rectangular (without hole) tablet with icons.                                                                            – another rectangular tablet (with hole) with ideograms.(These ideograms/logograms may have in the extreme the function of syllabograms)                                                         – a Round tablet (with hole) to all appearances shows the Aegean syllabograms, or even letters (Anatolian/archaic Greek).                                                                                              (except for 2 complex rituallic? marks/ideograms present in the right-hand lower quarter).

11. Are there any cases in the world of using by the same scribe of two or three writing systems?

Only exceptionally, two, e.g. the Roseta stone written with Egyptian hierogliphs and Greek letters, but there is no known case in which 3 writing systems appear (as in our case) and not with systems whose temporal spread  covers 2000-3000 years!      (Sumerian proto-cuneiform 3.300BC, Cretan  Hierogliphic 2,000 BC, linear A/B 1500 BC, Greek archaic writing 800-300BC) >> time span 3.000 years !

12. Is it claimed that the (by somewhat majority) the assumption  that the signs were used at religious ceremonies?

Although researchers make reference some for economic use and others for religious, none of them fully supports or demonstrate any of the alternatives. In other words, leave open the way for any interpretation (including a mixed one !?)
The scales is serious inclining for yes.                                                                                      (only slightly Not, since                                                                                                                        – the tablets contain only 2 complex ideograms (in the round of the right-bottom quarter) that could play a role in religious ceremonies,  otherwise all signs were used in different areas by different civilizations for true writing !                                                                           – many researchers noticed possible number marks, so economical purpose)                                Mainly Yes, since the round plate contains in the right-hand-bottom quarter 2 complex ideograms and in addition the rectangular one with the hole contains many ideograms/logograms, all of which are applicable to religious rites.                               And again, yes, as  it is possible that ONLY the upper half of the round tablet  contain a written/verbal/ritualic formula for use in such ceremonies. This may be, or sure it is the explanation, that this portion was usually hidden from the direct view of the passers-by, being covered by the rectangular one.

13. What about  scribe’s training on writing?

Most researchers claim that he was almost illiterated. I support the same idea. It seems that in general the tablets were covered with many signs from different writing systems and the only section where the scribe has managed to write is the upper half of the round tablet. Probably he was aware of this fact from the very beginning!                       (!…iliterated, but how happened he had the ability and the science to display signs used in large spatial and temporal expansion !)                                                                                          Having access to a large sign library, and an ordered, organized character of the signs on 3 different tablets,                                                                                                                                – Now, I am seeing the scribe different as in the past time, not as a person close to illiterate but maybe a priest(ess) ?, or rather kind of Berossus of his time !

14.How much new in extreme, could be the tablets ?

Theoretically and practically it could reach the very period of  archaic Greek writing 800-300 BC or that of the etheocretan wich goes/rich to our era/AC. 

From Wikimedia Commons,File:CretanEpichoricAlphabets.png

File:CretanEpichoricAlphabets.pngBut it is excluded to be newer from the early Middle Ages due to certain aging traces. The possibility of a inscription of recent date does not exceed that of being written, by a catholic teacher-priest !!!, (… who had access to old writings and documents.)                          The tablets are shown as a collection of signs, apparently scattered from different areas and periods of time, but nevertheless ordered and somehow divided into three major  evolution of writing categories.                                                                                                  Who could have done this? It is all easier when we are approaching modern times ? where the possibility of access to signs used in the past is increasing.

15. The signs on the tablets belong to or are placed in a specific, particular writing in the world?

No! In fact my entire work mainly includes the testing of the various writing systems. Unfortunately no tablet is matching entirely with one writing. But no chance for all 3 tablets simultaneously ! The greatest closeness, that is, the largest number of signs can be found in the Sumerian proto-cuneiform and almost equal to the letters of the Anatolian writings.(the signs are found in the various Anatolian writings, the top being the carian writing/alphabets).

From Alphabets of Asia Minor https://tied.verbix.com/project/script/asiam.html

Then follows a series of Mediteranean writings, in the top  being Aegean  writings.               For these reasons, the writing and of course the tablets seem to have a subsequent age newer  of 2.400 BC. (See also Cretan hierogglyphic 2200-2000 BC ,linear A, 1800-1500 BC). None of the tablets can be read using a specific writing for each/no match. Much impossible to read/read using a single  writing system for all three !

16. Strictly on sign appreciation What age could be given to the  the signs ?

Although many signs and to a large extent only “look-like” the sumerian ones reflecting only by far their shape, in the general signs show to be much more recent (new). Unfortunately, a few (really few)  have not been used in the concrete form present on tablets absolutely no in the world before 1,200-1,500 BC !(e.g. sign D ; …oops present in Indus/Harappa writing)

From https://sites.google.com/site/collesseum/qeiyafa-ostracon-2

                                                              Khirbet Qeiyafa ostracon (1.000 B.C. ?)

17. The tablets belong to  Danube, Old Europe, or a Daco-Thracian civilisations ?

No, the Danube civilization/The Old Europe has come close, but it hasn’t even reached the stage of the proto-writing. cause was not a highly socially stratified society in this area, and there were no mach attraction or dedication to writing. In fact, the  tablets are singletones,  absolute unique. The tablets of Gradeshnita, Karanovo, Dispilio belong to other cultures and other phases of writing evolution (proto-writing).                     Regarding Cris-starcevo and Vinca Civilisations:

From Ancient DNA from South-East Europe Reveals Different Events during Early and Middle Neolithic Influencing the European Genetic Heritage https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0128810

“Firstly, archaeological data show that the Neolithic expansion from Anatolia was not a single event but was represented by several waves of migrants [24]. In this respect the Proto-Sesklo culture in Greece, from which directly Starčevo-Criş in the North Balkans and indirectly LBK in Central Europe originate [2526] represents only the first great wave of Neolithisation of Europe [27]. A later great wave of migration from North-West Anatolia led to important cultures of South-Eastern Europe such as Vinča and Boian cultures [28].                                                                                                                               …………..The first Neolithic inhabitants of Europe are described archeologically as belonging to the Aegean Early Neolithic cultures [27], from which the bearers of both the Starčevo-Criş-Körös complex in Serbia, Romania and Hungary [2837] and the Linear Pottery culture in Central Europe (LBK) [21] emerged.                                                          …………These data are in line with the idea of a common origin of the LBK and Starčevo-Criş cultures from the Aegean Neolithic cultures of Northern Greece/Thessaly, the first Neolithic complex in Europe [24].                                                                                     ……………..Fernandez E, Perez-Perez A, Gamba C, Prats E, Cuesta P, Anfruns J, et al. (2014) Ancient DNA Analysis of 8000 B.C Near Eastern Farmers supports an Early Neolithic Pioneer Maritime colonization of Mainland Europe through Cyprus and the Aegean Islans. “

18. Was the scribe a native of Tartaria ?

Definitely not ! The local community did not know the writing. The tablets were inscribed by an individual of different origin. From Anatolia and possibly from the Egeana area (Crete ?), or if you want of proto-Greek origin. Note that Anatolia is close, bordering  the Aegean, Syrian and Danube areas; (there are also indications of the presence of Anatolian craftsmen in the area of Vinca). TT could, however, be effectively inscribed by that person in his home-place or in extreme even in Tartaria.

19. What made for living the scribe; what could be his occupation/profession  ?

Others opinion is the same as mine, could be an prospector, craftsmen but much sure tradesman.

20.From the perspective of the evolution and existence of all writing systems in the world, which is the location occupied by TT signs ?

Here I have to say that because of the great similarity of the signs with the sumerian proto-cuneiform shapes, as well as the written signs used in the Aegean and Anatolia, to a large extent, it was possible and relatively easy interpretation of TT using each or any of these above writings This shows on the one hand the origin of the writing, but also the spread of the writing in space and time. The scribe and signs were coming  from somewhere in the space delimited by these civilizations.

From Writing in Neolithic Europe; an Aegean origin?  https://novoscriptorium.com/2019/09/28/writing-in-neolithic-europe-an-aegean-origin/

“For many years the earliest writing was assumed to have originated in Uruk, in Sumeria, Mesopotamia c. 3100 BC. Evidence from Egypt has now dated writing to c. 3400-3200 BC, while evidence from the Indus Valley suggests a date of 3500 BC for the development of writing there.  In the 1980s, a system of writing was noticed in the Balkans of the Final Neolithic period. This was identified as “pre-writing” by Shan Winn (1981) and Emilia Masson (1984) who considered whether this constituted a Vinča “script.” They each concluded that the Vinča signs represented a “precursor” to writing.

 

…   The Neolithic expansion, as is generally accepted in our time, started from the Aegean towards the North and not the opposite (of course, there also exists the controversial issue of some supposed initial migrations from Anatolia-Near East which, as we have presented with the help of officially published material, do not seem to be the case. It is more likely that domesticated seeds and animals were adopted by the Aegeans, through Trade, from the East rather than that the Aegeans were…substituted by some ‘ghost’ Eastern population that does not at all culturally-archaeologically appear in the Aegean or Southeastern Europe during the Neolithic). Therefore we must derive that Writing expanded from the Aegean to the North and not the opposite as some researchers have suggested in the past.”

 

21. The tablets could carry real script /true writing ?

 General opinion of scientists and scholars specialised in proto-writing is pointing for NO. Cause they realised that the signs are similar to those used in proto-writing, namely the proto-cuneiform signs. The use of proto-cuneiform signs is conducting only and unique to proto-writing ! And because almost all the signs are similar to those proto-sumerian it is about sumerian proto-writing.

Scientists also noticed that part of the signs are not identical in shape with those sumerian-ones, but probably thought that are a kind of variant, local adaptation, without explaining or detailing where or how this could happened. Thus begining with a basically “sumerian interpretation” their’s are in general close one to another and also close to mine.  Some told of economical tablets, seeing on the upper-right part of the round tablet only cereals and numbers.                                                                                                  But if taking as true that this section had ezoteric content and was intentionally hidden, it is cristal-clear that nobody was hiding numbers ! So numbers or ezoteric content, only one out of twoo !                                                                                                       But others, were pointing to an religious content, and not few saw ideograms wich not only could be used in religious rituals but in fact were practically used as such on a larger scale. In reality, the signs could be used for both purposes. In and describing an offering ritual ( cereals/bread and animals/goats). What I noticed myself that those ideograms are somehow similar to those used in ancient Aegean writings, (Cretan hierogliphic and Linear A), with the  result close interpretation. (even if  the signs are much close to those sumerian ones. )                                                                                    Exemple of closeness/similarities of Aegean signs to those sumerian ones:                                                              

Semn sumerian    Semn Egeean          Semnificatie                                                                             As,Se                          Te                          Cereale                                                                                  Gu,Gud                      Mu                           taur                                                                               Amar                        (a)Ma                     vitel/zeita-Mama                                                                 An                              ?                          zeu,cer                                                                                       Bad                            Da(Sa?)                        sacrificat,mort/                                                                 Ab /Zag/Ga’ar             Labrys               templu,stralucire/divin                                                      Ud                              capra,ied                         capra,ied                                                           Dara                                -”                                    -“-                                                               Ararma                      Asasara                          zeitate astrala?                                                         Gar                                   D                              masura volum cereale

From  https://enigmatica.ro/placutele-de-la-tartaria/

Image result for tablitele tartaria

From https://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlj/2015/cdlj2015_001.html                                                           BAD: …it bears the meaning “sacrificed,” or in the case of humans, simply “dead.”

Image result for damerow proto-cuneiform

From https://brill.com/view/book/9789004352223/BP000008.xml (see no.7, UD/goat)

Image result for goat proto-cuneiform

Folowing signs, from  https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html

Ab Amar An Ararma As Sze/Se Ud5 Zag~a Zag~c Dara~3d Ga’ar~b1 Sur  Gar

 

All interpretations, of scientists and mine are sending to, are in close touch with an -religious ritual !  !

22. But if you ask me of an possible true writing ?

I say, I hope yes, on the round table, the top half, although we have there a kind of “impossible” combination of signs (“Doo/DDoc” sequence) and apparently no way out. However, in that half of the round tablet, we could have the archaic Greek letters:

Image result for tablitele tartaria pic from http://www.ziare.com/cultura/documentar/tablitele-de-la-tartaria-cea-mai-veche-scriere-a-lumii-descoperita-in-romania-1090967

To the left: Eta/Heta Rho/D?                                                                                                            And to the right:    Doo, DDoc?/ Dtwo?/RRoo, Roc?

What could be written, what possible texts?

It seems that we will never be able to have absolute certainty anymore, of any message or text. By one side                                                                                                              – we don’t know the language used, and by the other side                                                           – because there can be more possibilities of letters and not know for sure whether the P/D signs actually are for D or R letters ; and also,                                                                      – a concrete number of letters (even they are few !) may lead to a relatively large number of combinations of n as many as m)

Can one make suppositions at least?

Yes, there would be a set of proposals to be considered, for example:

Here Roc Roc Albanian here Rrok= time grab, understand

HeRos DiBoc=DiVos Greek Lord/master Zeu (use in religious ritual?)

EDE DiDou Greek “now give!”/”give to eat!” (This proposal is of some interest, since the root of the ED is present in both food-related words (e.g. EDTA) and in that of kid Ed.educs. We have one or more kids on the pictGraphics? So through the icon of the iedului can suggest the word Ed,Ede !: Mananca!/kid, iedule)

HeDe Didou Greek now,already give! (do you give it?; religious ritual?)

! Caution, *hed is the root Proto Indo-Europeana for ‘mananca’!

HRist(s) DDoc Latin “of the doctrine of christiana”

Hero, ERO DDoc (Decreto Doctor) Latin will be a doctor (Lat.”Professor”) in the theological doctrine)

etc

23. Again. Why 3 tablets, each with different “writing”, and how to explain this (only the appearance !) are there signs?

In fact, it is not a pile of signs. It Is the fruit of a conscious and deliberate effort. Remember, as for me, who have come to keep in mind hundreds of signs from each writing system, it would not necessarily be easy for me. If I intend to show to a student or any reader the main steps in the appearance and evolution of  writing, maybe I would do much the same.

On a tablet I would show pure icons/pictographs, as the ones on the pictographic tablet. I would choose about the same kind of basic signs, which almost identical meaning in the Sumerian proto-cuneiform as with those of cretan hyierogliphic  and Linear A.               Cereal and goat icons. There is also an absolute unclear sign , possible ghost, man, gods !?                                                                                                                                                            On the second (like rectangular tablet with hole), I would figure sumerian ideograms that are almost entirely and close shape found in the Aegean syllabograms .                                                           Signs: Cereals, Gods, labriys, Gods, Taurus).

 picture from https://www.descopera.org/tablitele-de-la-tartaria/

On the third (round tablet) I would figure the pure phonetic writing (but not necessarily alphabetic!).Those signs have corespondence in sounds . As summerian ideograms , Aegeene syllabograms, and even  to Greek and Anatolian letter wich has every of them coresponding phonemes/sounds.

Examples:

On the pictographic tablet:                                                                                                                  the grain/cereal Sumerian icon, similar to the Cretan sign for cereals. And then the common icon for the goat.

On rectangular tablet with hole, 3 examples:                                                                                  1. The sumerian sign “Se” <> the linear A sign  “Te“, cereal, grain.                                                2. Then the sign ‘Animal head with long ears’:                                                                                 the “AMAR” sumerian /calf and Cretan Hierogliphic /linear A “Mu”/Bull , linear B “Ma“/sign of Mother Goddess.                                                                                                                         3. And the sign of the Orion constellation, the “Zag“/ the shine of metal, linear “Labrys” sign of the linear A divine power.

-On the round plate, only 2 examples:                                                                                                 1. The H-sign with 3 bars is the sumerian “Ku“, linear A “Pa3″,canaanit “Heth” and archaic Greek  “Heta/Eta“, old Latin “H“.
2. Sign (as with # but only with 1 vertical bar):sumerian “Pa” and linear A “Pa” (later “Z” in many writings)

I don’t know why, also on the round plate, the right-bottom quarter, two complex ideograms appear, Picture from http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html

e.g. one (on the right) is like the temple of solar gods Shamash/ 

Proto-cuneiform sign UD.UNUG:”sun -inner temple”

Image result for borger ud.unug proto-cuneiform

the sign of the punic Goddess Tanit, astral Goddess as Ishtar=the sign of the minoan astral Goddess Asasara.

From https://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-africa/baal-hammon-and-tanit-0012136                                                                                                                       Symbol of Tanit, the consort to the king of the Punic pantheon. (mrholle / CC BY-SA 2.0) Punic Goddess Tanit

WHEN THE TOPIC IS THE DEVELOPEMENT OF WRITING, WIKIPEDIA COMES ALSO (as TT scribe have done and I also would do) WITH 3 MAIN STAGES:                                                                                                                       Din https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing

A conventional “proto-writing to true writing” system follows a general series of developmental stages:

  • Picture writing system: glyphs (simplified pictures) directly represent objects and concepts. In connection with this, the following substages may be distinguished:
    • Mnemonic: glyphs primarily as a reminder;
    • Pictographic: glyphs directly represent an object or a concept
    • Ideographic: graphemes are abstract symbols that directly represent an idea or concept.
  • Transitional system: graphemes refer not only to the object or idea that it represents but to its name as well.
  • Phonetic system: graphemes refer to sounds or spoken symbols, and the form of the grapheme is not related to its meanings.                                                                         ———————————————————-

24. What was aiming at, or real purpose of the tablets ?

If, after a sustained and tenacious effort, I managed, succeed to have in my little finger or mind, (… where you want), thousands of signs grouped into different writing systems; (not discuss my ability or expertise compared with others, though I want such a challenge). If I could make a collection of signs in this way, that is grouped on the main types of writing folowing the course of time, with all the possibilities of 20th century documentaries at my disposal, probably the result will be close to those tablets.

Who, for God’s sake, from where and how long, does not discuss with what purpose, made a collection of ordered signs and divided into three major groups of historical evolution ? Note, signs with an extension of their use on a 2.500- years  time-span ( ~2.500-500 ECB)?

REMEMBER, SHOWING WRITING EVOLUTION NOT IMPLY THAT THE AUDIENCE PERSON WILL/TAUGHT TO WRITE

25.I put under scrutiny an important question and subject to follow; I am looking forward to your opinions with great interest.

Remember, the tablets are real an material and  not coming from somewhere from the virtual reality, and therefore do not hold as copies of others, so there are original, they were made by someone, though, and in this way original and not counterfeit, fakes. 

 Although they have taken note of the similarities between the signs on the TT and those in the sumerian, they have limited themselves to referring quickly and perhaps somewhat superficial only to a few aspects.                                                                             

What completely escaped my understanding is that none of them noticed and did not refer to the fact that the somewhat grouped signs, as if somebody divided them into three categories of historical evolution ??.

For example, a researcher with dozens of publications and books, who has literally exhausted attacking the topic TT from the perspective of all interdisciplinary branches (archeology, history, culture, seminary, etc.) starting from the Neolithic, (if not near the mesolithic) these essential aspects escaped him. Namely the similarities with the Levantine, Aegean, Anatolian and Mediterranean civilizations writings, and maybe worse, not noticed this kind of display of seemingly arranged signs in historical, in temporal evolution, and I am referring here to Mr Marco Merlini                                                                                                                            Image result for tartaria tablets                                                                  Mr. Marco Merlini, from http://www.prehistory.it                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             (and mentioning his master, Prof. Gheorghe Lazarovici)

26. Possible explanation  ?

This spark-idea is mine, but not a recent-one, and could explain TT purpose and who wrote and/or used them . As to be brought at an unknown time and unknown religion by kind of missionary. The round tablet could have written on upper half,                                                                                                                                                                                               Pics from http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html

an ritualic formula, as out of the signs HP Di b o c , some could be:

greek : HEROS DIVOS = LORD GOD

latin:   HeRus  DeiVOS =    -“-      -“-

Note.                                                                                                                                                         “If” word God  is written, then like kind of Tetragrammaton m not to be pronounced, hidden like the name of YHWEH.(also have here 4 letters !)                                                   Was natural to be hidden from the view of passers-by, especially at the begining of christianism when followers were chased, ??

or a religious christian-like one ( “Our Father” pray: give us our daily bread

greek: HeDe/EDE !  DiDOS/DIDOU ! :Allready,this here,now/GIVE EAT !

latin:  ED/EDE   DeDou(i)=/DeDUI    : Kid-goat/EAT     GIVE!

From ETRUSCANS, VENETI and SLOVENIANS: A Genetic … http://www.korenine.si › zborniki › zbornik05 › belchevsky_rea                                                                                                           The barbarians were the ancient Europeans, non-Greeks, whose speech was not understood by the Greeks. ….. divos > dibos > qibos > qeios > qeos.

From https://www.etymonline.com › word
deva | Origin and meaning of deva by Online Etymology Dictionary
… cognate with Greek dios “divine” and Zeus, and Latin deus “god” (Old Latin deivos), from PIE root *dyeu- “to shine,” in derivatives “sky,

From https://linearbknossosmycenae.com/tag/ionic-greek/  by Richard Vallance Janke

didomi-linear-b-archaic-new-testament

(in pictographic tablet we have an kid-goat and something totally unclear, as a human silhuette with hands forward as giving)

…. or you will wonder what other possible formula.                                                                   The presence of the other signs on TT, which apparently do not contain writing, explain it to me by the intention of creating a framework, appearance, but also the feeling and atmosphere of continuity and the transmission of knowledge and religious concepts of a eternal nature, originating in the very distant past.                                                                 The fact that all the signs on TT were used in a place, time or another for writing, raises my suspicions to me. As if that person had access to sources such as the library from Alexandria or the Vatican?.In fact, I shouldn’t be so much, as the priests really had access to such sources and were among the main propagators of culture in general.

IN THE WORK OF FINDING A PLACE, REAL &TRUE IDENTITY FOR TT, WE ALL FOUND SO MANY UNCOMMON, EVEN WEIRD & PUZZLING CHARACTERISTICS THAT THE TOPIC TEND TO MOOVE STEP BY STEP, FROM WRITING & SCIENCE FIELD TO OBJECTS FOUND ON EARTH FALLEN FROM OUTER SPACE.

 

 

 

 

…a simple question for everybody > >

January 28, 2020

Image, from Writing indigenous languages Ancient accounting practices in the modern world Guest post by Fernando Toth (Professor of Anthropology, University of Buenos Aires)

Token: an art piece that mixes anthropology, experimental archaeology, archival analysis and regional history  https://crewsproject.wordpress.com/2019/04/                               me: see the last token

Ancient Mesopotamian clay tokens. Image from here.

Folowing picture, from Clay Token System The Three-Dimensional Precursors of Ancient Mesopotamian Writing by                                                         https://www.thoughtco.com/clay-tokens-mesopotamian-writing-171673                                        me: see that one before the last:

Clay Tokens, Uruk Period, Excavated from Susa, Iran. Louvre Museum (Department of Near Eastern Antiquities).

Table, from How Did Writing Evolve?                                                          https://russkiy.fun/ele/writing/#token-meaning                                                                               See column XIV/column before last one :                                                                                         Sumerians depicted by this shape an animal, “cow”

The shape of tokens coresponds to written symbols                                  =========================                                                                                                     From  Mnamon Ancient writing systems in the Mediterranean                                              A critical guide to electronic resources                                                                                             http://mnamon.sns.it/index.php?page=Scrittura&id=35&lang=en

“The Cretan Hieroglyphic script is a non-deciphered writing system found in Crete and, sporadically, on the islands of the Aegean Sea (Kythira and Samothrace)th  from the 18-th to the 17th centuries BC, the period of the so-called “First Palaces” on Crete. All the same, it is possible that it was first used in the “pre-palatial” period. In fact, some seals from central Crete, datable from the 21st to the 19th centuries BC, present traces of a similar writing system (the so-called “Archanes script”, named after the place where the seals were found).”                                                                                                                                Image from same site

Medallion from the Knossos ‘Hieroglyphic Deposit’, 18th century BC (Museum of Herakleion, Crete)

===== THE QUESTION IS ==========

If you give to some childs modelling clay for making some simple shapes, finally  how many will show by chance this shape ?                                                                                            1 out of 200; 1 out of 600; 1 out of 1.000 ?

Probably as Mr. E.Papakitsos and G.Kenanidis allready advanced the hipothesis, (me sustaining also with own arguments) that all Aegean writing systems, (beginning with Aegean Proto-Linear)                                                                                                                              – has a fillum=genetic relation with sumerian proto-cuneiform writing.                              & early minoans were sumerian migrants

From

http://www.researchgate.net › publication › 273885539_A_Comparative_Ling…                            (PDF) A Comparative Linguistic Study about the Sumerian
Evangelos Papakitsos at University of West Attica .
<< Based on the previous linguistic evidence and conditions, it has been
suggested that a very suitable candidate language as the base for creating the Aegean scripts could be the Sumerian. Being an agglutinative language, it both
exhibits the matching syllabic pattern of the CV-type, and it can justify the phonetic values of the Linear-A/B and Cypro-Minoan signs as well, through the rebus
principle. It is also suggested that the formation of each Aegean script could have been conducted in the late 3rd millennium BC by means of absorption from a parent
script, named Protolinear, being created by a scribal guild of Sumerian linguistic origin.>>
From http://www.sumerianz.com › pdf-files › sjss2(4)33-44                                                               Investigating the Origins of the Minoan Civilization PDF by EC Papakitsos 
‎<< CV-type phonotactic is usually found in agglutinative languages, a feature that in LA has been ignored although observed very early by Duhoux (1998) and recently by
Davis (2014) as well. Such a well-studied nearby agglutinative language of the 3rd millennium BCE were the Sumerian. Thus, instead of claiming that a very complex writing system had been intentionally devised, we may adopt a simpler explanation, according to the Ockham’s Razor principle (Rodríguez-Fernández, 1999), which is that
LA (and LB) script is a typical case of alloglottography (Rubio, 2006). According to the CP theory, the Sumerian scribes, who invented the original script, had to write in languages other than their own mother tongue, which can deduce that all the “non-Minoan” languages being written with LA/LB are quite distorted.
…. a suitable period of an arrival of the first Sumerian settlers at Crete can be defined between 2800-2600 BCE. >>
See:

http://www.academia.edu › Cretan_Hieroglyphics_and_Protolinear_Script                                        (PDF) Cretan Hieroglyphics & Protolinear Script| Giannhs …
Anistoriton Journal, vol. 15 (2016-2017) 
From

http://www.academia.edu › Minoan_Sumerian                                                                                          (PDF) Minoan Sumerian| Giannhs Kenanidhs –Evangelos C Papakits
Academia.edu
From

http://www.researchgate.net › publication › 279940914_Additional_Palaeogra…                                      (PDF) Additional Palaeographic Evidence for the Relationship .. E.Papakitsos I.Kenanidis
<< As explained in previous works, the Cretan Protolinear script was created by the Minoans, who were Sumerian settlers >>
See:     www.researchgate.net › publication › 320712507_A_Decipherment_of_…                                         (PDF) A Decipherment of the Eteocretan Inscription from Psychro…
See also: Possible connection between the cultures of Ancient Sumer and Minoan Crete https://mmtaylor.net/Holiday2000/Legends/Sumer-Crete.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~                                                                                                      I suppose that this sumerian “influence” was exercited in Crete and Cyclades (note that oldest remains in Aegean/EBA=EarlyBronzeAge are in Cyclades).                                               Further, I suppose that from Cyclades (as Tartaria artefacts found close by are evidenced), this early writing (carried by a 1-st,2-nd degree relative trader, metal prospector/craftsman ?), reached Danubian area, so we have the “mysterious Tartaria tablets”.

From http://www.ancient-origins.net › artifacts-other-artifacts › minoans-0011442                                   Pre-dating the Minoans: The Cycladic Civilization and Their

 

Vinca culture meanders, related to later Aegean labyrinth ?.

January 24, 2020

From  https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/meander                                                    a winding path or course   ; especially LABYRINTH
                                                                                                                                                           From http://www.merriam-webster.com › dictionary › labyrinth                                                         a place constructed of or full of intricate passageways and blind alleys.                                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~                                                                            Why humans needed from ancient time  to display such a tricky graphics and what was the meaning; how was related to averyday life or religion ? 
                                                                                                                                                              My opinion (and equally proposal( is as follows:
                                                                                                                                                          From most ancient time humans were enchanted, admired the cosmos and life show, got in extatic an prostation state before the sky. Life forms, direct visible could be touched but not understood. Life was magic .Life was represented and condensed in an image in different concret shapes, all close to entrails (a succesion of meanders), and represented “the nature matrix”, ( of human, mamals) the abode and origin of life.
Despite the fact that saw how humans appear and saw the birth, they thought that the first, original ancestor appeared from an egg, and their original-first mother was in fact a bird, bird-mother. Bird-Mother Goddess.
Tey associated  bird-humans-matrix-life
                                                                                                                                                           From https://eldermountaindreaming.com/2019/03/03/bird-songs-and-bird-tribe-shaman-women-their-culture-art-and-soul/
   
  1. uteruswomb
  2. dam (non-human female animal kept for breeding)
  3. sourceorigin
  4. listregister                                                                                                                 Etymology From māter(mother).

Also the course of life usually has with and apparent dead ends. Interesing enough they expected kind of second life after death. This would be either not easy, one must encounter challenges and pass over, for reaching the heaven at the end.

From pinterest.com   https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSQDJspLtC6d9zOHi7XON7E7t0Q2YE1EQnKdn3PaPzkqnyrg-BA&s

Image result for labyrinth history vinca Vinca/rituallic bread

Other opinion:  https://www.crystalinks.com/labyrinths.html                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <<  A labyrinth is an ancient symbol that relates to wholeness. It combines the imagery of the circle and the spiral into a meandering but purposeful path.                       It represents a journey to our own center and back again out into the world                        A labyrinth can be experienced as the birthing womb of the Great Goddess.          Thus, the labyrinth experience is a potent practice of Self-Integration as it encapsulates the spiraling journey in and out of incarnation. On the journey in, towards the center, one cleanses the dirt from the road. On the journey out, one is born anew to consciously dwell in a human body, made holy by having got a taste of the Infinite Center. >>

From https://books.google.ro › books
The Life Of Symbols
Mary Lecron Foster, Lucy Botscharow · 2019 · Social Science
“… womb is represented by a labyrinth (Figure 11.13) which may also be a meander. … Early Vinca culture (Rast, SW Romania)

From https://docplayer.net/47130363-The-living-goddesses-marija-gimbutas.html

Image result for labyrinth history womb vinca
See
http://www.theway.org.uk › back                                                                                                                           The Cosmic Womb: Labyrinths and Rebirth in … – The Way

“The argument of this paper is that the labyrinth is the womb, and the rituals associated “

                                                                                                                                                                                   Image from newgrange.com
From https://books.google.ro › books
The Hero’s Quest and the Cycles of Nature: An Ecological …Rachel S. McCoppin
“… Neolithic Earth Goddess myths where the Goddess, as a representation of nature, holds the power to take life, but also to resurrect life”

From

http://www.andrewcollins.com › page › articles › sagittarius                                                                     Göbekli Tepe’s Vulture Stone – A Warning Across Time or …  by A Collins – 
Pillar 43’s imagery more likely relates to early Neolithic beliefs and practices concerning the soul’s journey from the earthly plane to the realm of the dead, something now accepted by some of the leading archaeologists working at the site.
                                                                                                                                                          From http://www.ancient.eu › article › ancient-mesopotamian-beliefs-in-the-afterlife                             Ancient Mesopotamian Beliefs in the Afterlife – Ancient History …
Conclusions                                                                                                                                          In Mesopotamian conceptions of the afterlife, life did not end after physical death but continued in the form of an eṭemmu, a spirit or ghost dwelling in the netherworld. Further, physical death did not sever the relationship between living and deceased but reinforced their bond through a new set of mutual obligations. Just as the well-being of the ghost in the netherworld was contingent upon offerings from the living, so too was the well being of the living contingent upon on the proper propitiation and favor of the dead. To a notable degree, these afterlife beliefs reflected and reinforced the social structure of kinship ties in Mesopotamian communities.

From neokoolt.wixsite.com › oldeurope › single-post › 2015/07/24 › VinčaTu…                                  Vinča-Turdaș Culture | Old Europe – Wix.com

                                                                                                                                                                   ” Gimbutas dated the civilisation of Old Europe from 6500 to 3500-3200 BC.                            It was at that time that the area was overrun by invading Indo-Europeans. The local population could do two things: remain and be ruled by new masters, or migrate, in search of new lands. It appears that the people of Old Europe did both: some went in search of a haven to the south, on the shores of the Aegean Sea, and beyond.            Harald Haarmann has identified them as being responsible for the rise of the so-called Cycladic culture, as well as Crete, where the new settlers arrived around 3200 BC.”
Later, in minoan civilisation, the labyrinth, beside the Minotaur lore, in fact was a temple of the Lady of the Lbyrinth :da-pu-ri-toyo Po-ti-ni-ya”, where rituals were performed.                                                                                                                                                  In many and many caves, if not were found double-headed axes, but also depicted labrys symbols.

From  The multi-symbolic profile of caves:  

spiritual landscapes, disaster environments and cultural monuments
Amanda Laoupi

https://www.academia.edu/33346853/The_multi-symbolic_profile_of_caves_spiritual_landscapes_disaster_environments_and_cultural_monuments

                                                                                                                                                                “2.1 The labyrinth as cave /cosmic womb

Caves being ambiguous spaces, offer both protection and shelter, but can also trap and imprison. Because of their location within theEarth, which many cultures have identified as female, the caves have been identified as the womb of Mother Earth, being associated with regeneration and birth. Although sacredness may have been invested in many other natural forms and objects, during the Prehistoric Times,the earliest known sacred places where shamanic initiations took place, are naturally-formed caves. The cave as spiritual landscape, acts like an ‘ interiority’. Its direction is inward,
 but it is also down and the cave journey involves ‘getting down’. The heart, womb, and
cauldron are all inward, earthy spaces.                                                                                        As such,they involve a directness toward core and awayfrom periphery, toward depth and away fromsurface, toward concentration and away fromdispersion.

Moreover, labyrinths appear in various countries throughout the world as a strong symbolic archetype. This mystical symbol is at once the universe, the individual life, thetemple, the town, human existence, the cave /womb or intestines of the Mother Earth as its counterimage, the convolutions of the brain, theconsciousness, the heart, the pilgrimage, the journey and the way. In its duality, it is cosmos to those who know the way, and chaos to those who lose it. It is Ariadne’s thread, whosewindings create the world and yet enable us to unravel it or ravel it… This symbolic ‘conjunctio oppositorum’ is the place where opposites such as life/death, light/dark, male/female, are transformed and melt into each other, in the dance of the spiral.                                                                                                                     The Cretan labyrinth had been a dancing ground made for Ariadne rather than for Minos .‘Homer compares the dance worked by Hephaistos on the shield of Achilleus to a dance made by Daidalos, because he had never seen more clever workmanship’ (Paus.         The paths in the maze are dances that are performed by the participants in the ceremony. These dances prove that though many paths are taken, and some are a dead-end,life continues through. This is the key of the Dionysian rituals, Dionysos being her immortal husband.                                                                                                                       In the original story, Ariadne was a Goddess,who provided guidance through the mysterious temple maze of ancient Crete, where she presided as priestess.                      Her famous spiral-like thread helped seekers to find their way safely in and out. The real hero is one who can keep hold of the labyrinth’s thread, not fearing it, but following it to find self-actualization, spiritualrebirth and love. Another version of the story of Ariadne makes her a Goddess and lover, but also a destroyer. The labyrinth is her womanly cycle, the cave her womb and Minotaur her heart. Therefore, the traveller of the labyrinth learned lessons of ecstasy, transformation and immortality “

                                                                                                                                                               Even later, From

http://www.stijnvandenhoven.com › 2015/09/23 › symbols-of-the-minoan-…                                       Symbols of the Minoan Goddess Religion – Stijn van den Hoven
                                                                                                                                                                  “The connection between so-called ”fertility rituals” of ancient Goddess cultures and deeper spiritual mysteries becomes clear when seen in the light of the Mystery Cults that were a continuation of the Cretan religion: Despite its use of ”fertility symbols” such as grains, the great concern of the Mystery Cults was the fate of the soul in death and its resurrection, its salvation, through the grace of the Great Goddess. The Cretan religion, again, was a continuation of the ancient traditions of Goddess worship in Old Europe”

=============================================                                                                     Si apoi, apropos de oasele gasite ?”langa?” tablite, se presupune ca a avut loc un ritualun ritual de ingropare secundara.

Din Resurrection through decomposition: The role of secondary burials in the journey to the Afterlife 

“For some cultures death is the beginning of a spiritual purification process that starts with decomposition and ends with skeletonization. The people in these cultures believe that before a soul can reunite with their ancestors in the Land of the Dead the body must completely decay.                                                                                                                                  There are typically two burial phases in these societies: initial and secondary burial.  During the initial burial the body maybe buried or exposed while it decomposes, and the funeral ceremony during this phase marks the beginning of the soul’s journey. Once the remains are completely skeletonized the bones are collected, cleaned, and placed in a secondary burial, like an ossuary.  After the secondary burial, the deceased is considered truly dead and the soul is resurrected to join their ancestors.”

===============================                                                                                                              From Genesis Encyclopedia: 30,000, Labyrinths, Spirals, and Meanders. pdf Joan, Eahr Amelia. Re-Genesis Encyclopedia: Synthesis of the Spiritual Dark Motherline, Integral Research, Labyrinth Learning, and Eco-Thealogy. Part I. Revised Edition II, 2018. CIIS Library Database. (RGS.), 2018   Eahr Joan

   Ouroboros.

Going on means going far,Going far means re-turning.(Tao Te Ching.)

Manifold Ways of Knowing.

The labyrinth is the winding, all-encompassing path;meandering here and there, moving nonlinearly toward, then away from, then toward the goal again-patient path that seems to enjoy its own winding [serpentine] journey. …                                                                           Manifold ways of knowing [that] …suggests the multiplicity of being [be-ing]– the vast possibilities of what may be realized in the form of concrete particulars.                              The winding labyrinth path that touches and depends upon each and every point of its area may symbolize the infinite possibilities that may be realized-an infinite appreciation of a pluralistic universe.

Wholeness.

Primary ontological assumptions: the universe is basically a single whole within which every part is connected to every other part. This wholeness includes every aspect accessible to human awareness –the physical world as discerned through our physical senses, and all the contents of consciousness.

Spiral.

[A]n elementary unicursal labyrinth as they have an indirect path leading to a hidden center.

Labyrinth Spiral Meander Origins.

The labyrinth can be traced back to the spiral and meander c. 30,000 BCE. This new prominence is supportedby further engraved artifacts and stones plus, cave finds.

Labyrinth.

Place of the labrys.

Labyrinthos.

‘Meaning [is] from the word labrys (labrys/lip)’ fertile womb of the Great Mother Earth.

Katabasis.

With each new spiraling re–turn or katabasis to mother earth, is the possibility of another Re-Genesis.

Re-Genesis.

The labrys is a manifestation of incantation rites and metamorphosis

or re–generative rituals. The emergence of the aniconic phenomena of the labyrinth can be traced back to the spiral and meander c. 30,000 BCE.                                                             * This new prominence is supported by further engraved artifacts and stones plus cave finds that include:                                                                                                                                 * the oldest ‘picture layers’ from the Altamira (Santander) Cave (EP: 295,                             * meandering imagery on a bull’s head from the ceiling in Altamira (Santander) Cave (EP: 301, Fig. 188, 300);                                                                                                                         * mammoths and bird goddesses plus other full breasted goddesses located in the gallery known as the Hall of the Hieroglyphs in the Pech –Merle Cave (EP: 52, 54, 295, 305, 397, 530, 538, Fig. 18);                                                                                                                                   * sixty spiral cupules from a rock shelter in La Ferrassie, Dordogne,France (EP: 136, Figs. 79, 138);                                                                                                                                                          * bird goddess with engraved meanders, Mezin, Ukraine                                                       * an engraved bone with a serpentine pattern of sixty-nine spherical indentations from Abri Blanchard, Dordogne in the Gorge d’Enfer Rock Shelters (TROC: 44-9, 54, 90, Figs. 7, 9, 10 a-b, 8); plus                                                                                                                                     * spirals, meanders, and goddesses from Mal’ta, near Irkutsk, Siberia.                                            ————————————————                                                                                              For a more in depth discussion and detailed images, see ARAS (The Archive for

Research in Archetypal Symbolism), http://resources.ciis.edu:2058/index.aspx.

ARAS record numbers include: 1Ca.002; 1Ca.003; 1Ca.008; 1Ca.016a; 1Ca.060b and

1Ca.104a. The keyword phase is, “meanders and spirals.” Also see ARAS record

numbers: 1Ca.061 and 1Ca.062, keyword is “Mal’ta.” * (For the first Re-Genesis

entry that includes the spiral, see 50,000 BCE, African Homo Sapiens Migrations

and Matrilineal Motherline. (RGS.))                                                                                                         ——————————————-                                                                                                  Further research recommendations:

Although c. 30,000 BCE saw a further development of the aniconic spiral and the

meander, it was during the Neolithic (8000-3500/3000 BCE) that the labyrinth and

labyrinthine engravings became more pronounced along with the coil, spiral

(oculi), snake, concentric circles, and owl goddess configurations. Selected

Neolithic labyrinthine ceramics, seals, sites, monuments, and other related

iconographic research includes: 6000-5500 Sesklo Seal (COG: 317, Fig. 1); 6000

sandstone sculptures with labyrinthine/uterine designs, Lepenski Vir, Serbia

Danube (PRR: 36-37, LOG: 157); 5790-5750 kilim with labyrinth design, Çatal

Hüyük Anatolia ARAS Record, 2Da.117; 5500-5200 ceramics, Bukk Culture,

northeast Hungary and east Slovakia (COG: 43-7); 5200-5000 meander/labyrinth,

Banjica near Belgrade, Early Vinca (COG: 313, Figs. 8-11); 5500-4000 ceramics,

Dimini Culture, Greece (COG: 25-29); 4500 Karanovo-Gumelnita square labyrinth

homes; 4000-3000 Locmariaquer, Brittany France; 4000-3500 Gavr’Innis (or

Gavrinis), Brittany France; 3800, Hal Saflieni Hypogeum, Malta; 3500-3200 New

Grange or Newgrange, County Meath, Dowth, and Knowth Ireland (COG: 214, Fig.

6-33 plus 298, Figs. 7-119; SOTG: 115); 3400 Egyptian tomb of King Perabsen (or

Peribsen) (MLW: 33, Fig. 38); 3300, Tarxien, Malta (MS: Fig. 55); 3250 Abydos,

Egypt; 3150 Tomb of King Ka’a, First Dynasty, Egypt; 3100 Stonehenge,

England; 3000 Avebury, England; 3000 Woodhenge, England; 3000 Troy,

Anatolia; Entrail-labyrinth, Mesopotamia (MS: Fig. 2); Rocky Valley near

Cornwall, England; Clear Island Co. Cork Ireland (MMG: 256; ancient Val

Camonica, Lombardy, Italy (LCS: Fig. 7); Naquane in Valcamonica, Italian Alps;

Mogor, Galicia (MMG: 256); Casal, Minho Portugal (MMG: 256); Lerfall, Ukraine;

Knossos, Crete; and spirals on numerous clay stamps. (LOG: 123, Fig. 193.)

Further research for the labyrinth and related BCE labyrinthine examples that

followed the Neolithic, includes: 2000, Knossos coin pattern, later apparent on

Gotland Island in Sweden and the US Hopi Indian tribes (TK: 82-83); and 1842-

1797 Egyptian Labyrinth Temple of Amenemhet (or Amenemhat) III (NLEL: 111-

120; LFS: 21). Egyptian meander hieroglyphs and possibly the first Greek key

pattern (LFS: 5-7); 1750 literary descent of Sumerian Inanna, Urak, Babylon (RAR);

1700 Phaistos Disk, plus Cretan palaces, labyrinths, and owl coins (MS: Fig. 51);

Dapuritojo (Lady of the Labyrinth) as invoked at Knossos (ETG: 26) and also

mentioned in the Linear B inscriptions (MHE: 138); Glastonbury Tor, England;

Labyrinth Court, Palatine Hill, Rome; Malekula, New Hebrides Island; burial

chamber Bryn Celli Ddu on Anglesey Island, Wales; 1000 representation of

Solomon’s Labyrinth (ARAS, record #5Do.002); 1000 BCE, Montegrande mound in

Peruvian city of Jaen; 100 BCE to 700 CE famed Nazca Lines in the Peruvian

Desert; and Oraibi Arizona USA. (MLW: 32, Fig. 37.)

Similar patterns of the labyrinth, labyrinthine subterranean passages, spirals, and

meanders continued to emerge for thousands of years on stone engravings,

numerous painted cave walls, and sacred sites in: Egypt; Africa; Australia;

Scandinavia; Turkey; Mesopotamia; Russia; India; Indonesia; Tibet; Greece;

Brittany; China; South America; and American Pueblos tribes including the

Hopis, Zunis and the Pimas. (LCS: xxii-xxiii; 24.)Selected CE examples include: the labyrinth mosaic of Theseus and the minotaur

(ARAS, 3Pg.001); 500 Villa of the Mysteries fresco (Villa dei Misteri); ‘initiation

and descent ritual’ of Roman women plus the House of the Labyrinth, Pompeii

Italy (ARAS record #3Pa.017); 9

th

century Samarra Mosque, Iraq (MS: Fig. 48); 12 c.

Gethsemane Courtyard fresco in Jerusalem; 1167-1200 city plan of the walls of

Jericho (LCS: 12, Fig. 33); 1200 Chartres Cathedral (TGG: 35) * plus the Cathedrals at

Poitiers, Amiens, Ravenna, and St. Omer (LCS); 1400 Notre Dame, Paris; 1510

vulva labyrinth design (MLW: 85, Fig. 127); 1549 Villa d’Este Tivoli Gardens (MLW:

116, Fig. 177); 1674 Versailles; 1699 Saffron Walden (best preserved UK turf

labyrinth), Essex England (MLW: 52-3, Fig. 79-81); 1899 Vincent Van Gogh’s Starry

Night France (MS: 25); and the 1991 indoor labyrinth followed by the 9-3-1995

outdoor labyrinth installations at Grace Cathedral, San Francisco, CA.

* Black Madonna With Child of Chartres, France was whitewashed in 2013 CE.

THEORY:

Kerenyi theorizes that the labyrinth, spiral, and meander are [unicursal] paths or

journeys in which one re-turns to the beginning. (D: 92-96.) Labyrinth means the

place of the labrys. (MTPC: 11: n. 7.) The etymology for both labyrinth and labrys is

the Greek labyrinthos, ‘a network of intricate passageways.’ “The palace of

Knossos was itself called labyrinthos, or ‘the palace of the double-axes and both

the labyrinth, a universal symbol of the uterine maze, and the double-axe (or

labrys), derive their meaning from the word labrys (/labia/lip),’” fertile womb of

the Great Mother Earth. (EW: 65.) Cameron adds that from this same “root comes

the word labia, the elaborate folds of the labia majora and the labia minora of the

vulva. The butterfly/double – axe symbol could represent [the] opened labia.” (SA:

10, n. 7.) Adding to the butterfly – labia consideration, archaeologist Sir Arthur

Evans “published a series of chrysalises, butterflies, and goddesses related to

chrysalises or with butterfly wings. (RN: 53-71.) He interpreted the chrysalis as an

emblem of new life after death.” (GGE: 186-7.)

In addition to the labrys symbols, ‘butterfly – chrysalises – labia’, the double-axe

conjoined at apexes is also a prototype of Cretan labia and a common theme

found in Minoan – Mycenaean art. The double-axe (or more appropriately labium

(SA: 10)) has two conjoined triangles at the apexes. Also, images of Minoan –

Mycenaean butterflies are frequently portrayed with double-axe wings or

conjoined triangles at the apexes. (See, MMRS: 195. Fig. 90 (41).) According to

Gimbutas, “these schematized butterflies are the prototypes of the Minoan double

– axe.” (GGE: 186.) The ancient symbols for the triangle, double-axe, and butterfly

may well be the X and V as first introduced in Re-Genesis 70,000 entry, Blombos

Cave followed by numerous other Re-Genesis entries as noted below. For

additional V/triangle/vulvic research, see (GGE: 186-7; LOG: 13; WAM: 116-8; ECLE.)

Further X considerations include Holy for the Goddess.

Concerning the use of the mark X in Near Eastern religions, Urs Winter,

  1. cit., 301 quotes O. Keel who discovered that the X on the forehead of

certain Near-Eastern statuettes is a sign, which identified the woman as

belonging to the goddess. The X, which in old Canaanite alphabet is the

same as, the letter Taw meant ‘Holy for the goddess.’ So were cakes and

breads also marked that were dedicated to the goddess. From the Old

Testament, Keel refers to Ex 28.36 and Ezekiel 9.4-6 where such signs

were used meaning a dedication for JHWH. See also Urs Winter, op. cit.

  1. 569 concerning remarks on terra-cotta figures, which may represent

baked goods with the sign of an X (TVG: 188, n. 64).The double – axe indicates significant objects of worship that were used for ritual

purposes in caves, mountains, and on altars in temple shrines including the Shrine

of the Double-axe and the Tomb of the Double-Axe. These and other labyrinth

cave sanctuaries are considered as prototypes of 12

th

century CE cathedrals. It is

also of note that the sizes of double-axes vary significantly. Many are either 6-8

feet tall (MAL: 30-31, Fig. 9) such as the ‘pillar culture’ finds from the Dictaean

Cave as discussed by Evans (MTPC: 9-13) – or – much smaller bronze or stone

votive objects found in conjunction with priestesses and rituals. Re-Genesis

suggests that the labrys is a manifestation of incantation rites and metamorphosis

or re-generative rituals. Interpretations of the labrys include the: labia; butterfly;

chrysalises; double-axe conjoined at apexes; figure 8 (eternity); earth’s center;

and the waxing and waning moon. Significance may be a homecoming to self and

mother (or cosmocentric matrix) that sparks or enhances be – ing and be – coming

as in re-creation i.e. thelytokous parthenogenesis/autopoiesis. This awakening

spark might also be compared to the “spark of the indigenous genius of

humankind” that each person embodies. (NHI: 155.) Self-actualized numinosity.

The re – turning journey to the labrys is known in Greek as the katabasis or the

descent. Metaphorically walking the labyrinth may have three stages including:

detachment; parthenogenetic re – birth; and then integration or a Re-Genesis

during the exit or ascent. In Mazes and Labyrinths of the World, W. F. Jackson

Knight links the labyrinth to death and rebirth themes as a: “microcosm of the

earth and a macrocosm of the human anatomy.” (MLW: 10; MLT.)

In death one returns to the earth, the mother, from which one is eventually

reborn. The presence of the labyrinth at burial structures signifies a ritual

entry into the earth; the labyrinth represents both the earth and the human

body as sources of life (MLW: 10; MLT).

Following Jackson’s theme that in death is the return to mother earth, *

propose the universal quest of all seekers and pilgrims to the womb – cavern to

reunite with one’s origins.

Because the journey into the cavern of the underworld [or labyrinth

Cosmic – womb] is the central human quest, the womb – cavern is the

archetype of every holy – of – holies. It is as though architecture has

recorded for eternity the forgotten goal of religion [spirituality] – to

reunite with the feminine [female] principle in order to transcend duality

and attain wholeness, oneness, and enlightenment (BT: 36).

* For an 11

th

century translation of a Hymn to Mother Earth:

Battaglia, Frank. “Goddess Religion in the Early British Isles.” Varia on the

IndoEuropean Past: Papers in Memory of Marija Gimbutas. Eds. Miriam

Robbins Dexter, and Edgar C. Polomé. Journal of Indo-European Studies

Monograph No. 19 (1997): 67-73. (GR.)

From the earliest, spirals, meanders, labyrinths, and labryses starting with ancient

rock and cave symbols and engravings are reminders of human’s “unceasing

preoccupation with the spiral order and his [one’s] spiral development.” (MS: 29.)

The spiral may also “be thought of as an elementary unicursal labyrinth as they

have an indirect path leading to a hidden center.” (MLW: 18.)

The spiral or labyrinth [and meander], depicted in ancient tombs,

implies a death and reentry into the womb of the earth, necessary before

the spirit can be reborn in the land of the dead. But death and rebirth also

mean the continuous transformation and purification of the spirit

throughout life; the alchemists use the word VITRIOL to stand for Visita interiora terrae rectificando invenies occultum lapidem. ‘Visit the interior

of the earth; through purification thou wilt find the hidden stone.’ Such a

descent into the underworld (the kingdom of Pluto) is the theme for most

initiation rituals, and is comparable to the passage through the wilderness,

or the ‘dark night of the soul,’ which is experienced by mystics [and all

soul seekers] on their path. It is furthermore [almost] always symbolized

by the spiral. Those on the columns of the Treasury of Atreus (a relic

which is still to be found in the volutes of the Ionic column) have a further

correspondence; by passing between two spiral columns, the initiate

becomes the central axis or pillar and consciousness and equilibrium, for

he [/she] has thus passed between two opposite pillars of the Tree of Life,

or between the coils of the serpents of the caduceus, and has thereby come

into direct contact with the Source of Being (MS: 29-30).

In a more contemporary light, the soul or spirit’s search for wholeness is an

ongoing labyrinthine journey back to the labrys that includes further

considerations such as the: center, matrix, matter or mother earth. With each new

spiraling re-turn or katabasis to mother earth, is the possibility of another Re-

Genesis. In William Braud’s article, “The Ley and the Labyrinth: Universalistic

and Particularistic Approaches to Knowing” he eloquently speaks to a spiraling

return (or nonlinear) process.

The labyrinth is the winding, all-encompassing path; meandering here and

there, moving nonlinearly [or nonlinear] toward, then away from, then

toward the goal again – patient path that seems to enjoy its own winding

[serpentine] journey. … Manifold ways of knowing [that] …suggests the

multiplicity of being [be-ing] – the vast possibilities of what may be

realized in the form of concrete particulars. The winding labyrinth path

that touches and depends upon each and every point of its area may

symbolize the infinite possibilities that may be realized – an infinite

appreciation of a pluralistic universe (LL: 1, 17).

Further research on the labyrinth, labrys, spiral, and meander: 30,000-25,000,

Aurignacian Age; 3000, Founding of Troy; 2700, Silbury Hill, England; 2600-

2000, Early Bronze Age, Crete, Chthonian; 2000-1450, Middle Bronze Age,

Crete; 2000, Asherah; and 1450-1260, Hattusa and Yazilikaya, Anatolia. For a

significant tomb with multiple spirals, see the Castelluccio tomb door #34 in Re-

Genesis entry, 19

th

to 15

th

BCE, Castelluccio Culture. (RGS.)

Re-Genesis research on ancient healing/re-generating centers, some more well

known than others: Anatolian Bursa, Pergamon/Asclepion, Perge, Pamukkale,

Ephesus and Bogazkoy; Egyptian Philae, Dendera, Abu Simbel/Abshek’s Sacred

Cave, and Kom Ombo; Roman Villa of Mysteries, Herculaneum, and Pompeii;

Greek Kos; Minoan Crete; Megaliths Stonehenge, Avebury, Woodhenge, and

West Kennet Long Barrow; ancient chalk mound Silbury Hill; Celtic

Glastonbury/Chalice Well, and Brythonic Bath; Breton Gavrinis; Eire/Ireland’s

Knowth and Newgrange; Syrian Palmyra, * and Iberian – Roman Alhambra.

* UNESCO world–heritage site Palmyra was invaded and seized by Islamic

militants on 5–20–2015. Ancient Palmyra was a major caravan juncture for

centuries, crossroad center of trade, dark–deity rituals, water–healing facilities,

and mercantile information exchange resource for Greek, Roman, Persian and

Islamic cultures. As a world–crossroad repository, Palmyra’s archaeology is/was

(?) an iconic legacy and archive of ancient civilizations.

Further underworld/labyrinthine descent (Greek, katabasis) research: 4000,Sumer, Mesopotamia and Myth; 1750, Hammurabian Dynasty, Babylon, Ishtar,

and Inanna; 1750, Ishtar; 630-620, Goddess Kore, Izmir Turkey; 528, Agrigento,

Sicily; 500, Greek Mysteries; 282-263, Demeter’s Priene Temple; and 200,

Greece and Pergamon, Anatolia. * (RGS.)

* For the matrix of descent and re–turned deities see RG: 37-48 CE, Mary and

Pagan Goddesses.

(Further research on the Pergamon mystery rites is pending, including the nearby

Amazon temple site at Myrina.)

Keyword suggestions for further research about possible cities founded by

Amazons, include: Smyrna (Izmir); Ephesus; Cyme (Side); Gryneium; Prjene

(Priene); Pitane (Western Anatolia; Mytilene (Lesbos); Troy; Samothrace; and

outside of Pergamum (Pergamon).

Further V/triangle/vulvic research : 70,000, Blombos Cave; 34,000-28,000, Les

Eyzies Vulva Engravings, Dordogne Caves; 31,000, Chauvet Cave and Vulva

Engravings; 30,000-25,000, The Aurignacian Age; 30,000-25,000, Goddess of

Willendorf, Austria; 8000/7000-5000, Early Neolithic; 7000-5000, Early

Neolithic Crete; 5500-3500, Cucuteni (Tripolye) Culture, Eastern Europe; 5300-

4300, Climactic Phase and Script in Old Europe; 4000-3000, Locmariaquer,

Brittany Hook Symbology; 4000-3500, Gavrinis, Brittany France; 2000, Asherah;

1900-1800, Dawning of the African Alphabet and the Aniconic Goddess Triangle;

1790-1700, Goddess of Kultepe, Anatolia; 1500, Lachish Ewer, Triangle, and

Menorah; and 800, Tanit (Also Taanit, Ta’anit, Tannit, or Tannin). (RGS.)

Further research on vulva images: 34,000-28,000, Les Eyzies Vulva Engravings,

Dordogne Caves; 31,000, Chauvet Cave and Vulva Engravings; 30,000-25,000,

Aurignacian Age; 30,000-25,000, Goddess of Willendorf, Austria; 25,000-20,000,

Goddess of Laussel; 5300-4300, Climactic Phase and Script in Old Europe; 3000-

2000, Cycladic Goddesses; 2600-2000, Early Bronze Age, Crete, Chthonian; and

400, Celtic Sheela-na-gig. (RGS.) *

* For additional CE information, see illustration of a 1600 c. vulva labyrinth

design in: Bord, Janet. Mazes and Labyrinths of the World. New York, NY:

Dutton, 1976. 85, Fig. 127.) (MLW.)

Further research on symbolic systems including the V/triangle/vulvic cave

engravings and gender emergence:

Caldwell, Duncan. “Supernatural Pregnancies: Common Features and New

Ideas Concerning Upper Paleolithic Feminine Imagery.” Arts &

Cultures. Geneva, Switzerland: Barbier-Mueller Museums, 2010. 52-75.

(SPC.)

Clottes, Jean, and J. David Lewis-Williams. The Shamans of Prehistory:

Trance and Magic in the Painted Caves. Trans. Sophie Hawkes. New

York, NY: Harry N. Abrams, 1998. (SOP.)

Conroy, L. P. “Female Figurines of the Upper Paleolithic and the Emergence

of Gender.” Women in Archaeology: A Feminist Critique. Eds. Hilary

du Cros and Laurajane Smith. Canberra, Australia: Dept. of Prehistory,

Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University,

  1. 153-160. (FF.)

Jabr, Ferris. “Ars Longa.” New York Times Magazine, Dec. 7, 2014: 18, 20.

(ARSL.)

Joan, Eahr Amelia. “Ochre’s Living Lineage: The Gyne-Morphic Bloodline of

Spirituality.” Publication, 2018. (OLL.)

Lewis-Williams, David J. The Mind in the Cave: Consciousness and theOrigins of Art. London, England: Thames and Hudson, 2002. (MIC.)

Marler, Joan, and Miriam R. Dexter, Eds. Signs of Civilization: Neolithic

Symbol System of Southeast Europe. Novi Sad, Hungary: Institute of

Archaeomythology, 2009. (SC.)

McCoid, Catherine Hodge and LeRoy D. McDermott. “Toward

Decolonizing Gender.” American Anthropologist 98.2 (Jun.

1996): 319-326. (TDG.)

Rubin, Alissa J. “A Mirror of Subterranean Wonders: Replica of

Chauvet Cave Bristles with Lifelike Paintings.” New York

Times, Apr. 25, 2015: C1-C2. (MSW.)

Tedlock, Barbara. The Woman in the Shaman’s Body: Reclaiming the

Feminine in Religion and Medicine. New York, NY: Bantam Books,

  1. (WSB.)

Further research indicates that ancient cave artists who made the hand stencils

‘were predominately female’:

Snow, Dean. “Sexual Dimorphism in European Upper Paleolithic Cave Art.”

American Antiquity 78.4 (Oct. 2013): 746-76

Further research on the double-axe including: sites and sanctuaries; hourglass;

butterflies; chrysalises; labia, labrys (katabasis); figure 8; X; plus, bucrania and

bull’s heads:

Evans, Sir Arthur. “‘The Ring of Nestor:’ A Glimpse into the Minoan After-

World and a Sepulchral Treasure of Gold Signet-Rings and Bead-Seals

from Thisbê, Boeotia.” The Journal of Hellenic Studies 45. Part 1

(1925): 1-75. (RN.)

Gimbutas, Marija Alseikaite. Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe, 6500-3500

BC: Myths and Cult Images. 2nd ed. London, England: Thames and

Hudson, Ltd., 1984. [The Gods and Goddesses of Old Europe, 7000-3500

BC: Myths, Legends, and Cult Images. Berkeley, CA: University of

California Press, 1974.] (GGE.)

_____. The Language of the Goddess. San Francisco, CA: Harper San

Francisco, 1989. 239-243, 270-275. (LOG.)

_____. The Civilization of the Goddess: The World of Europe. San Francisco,

CA: Harper, 1991. 244-248, (COG). (See extensive index.)

Nilsson, Martin Persson. The Minoan-Mycenaean Religion and its Survival in

Greek Religion. 1927. New York, NY: Biblo and Tannen, 1950. 165-

235and 195, Fig. 90 (41.) (MMRS.)

Further research on parthenogenesis/self-seeding/self-making/autopoiesis and 21

century routine aspects of self-fertilized eggs = two X chromosomes:

Capra, Fritjof. The Web of Life: A New Understanding of Living Systems. New

York, NY: Anch…….>>

 

 

Insemnele culturii Vinca nu au ajuns (din pacate) sa se finalizeze nici macar in proto-scriere.

January 22, 2020

    Din https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protoscriere                                                                        << Primele sisteme de scriere apărute la începutul epocii bronzului nu au reprezentat o invenție bruscă. Mai degrabă, ele s-au dezvoltat pe baza unor tradiții mai vechi ce constau din diferite sisteme de simboluri care nu pot fi clasificate ca scrieri proprii deși au multe caracteristici izbitor de asemănătoare cu scrierea. Aceste sisteme pot fi descrise ca fiind proto-scriere. Aceste sisteme folosesc simboluri ideografice și/sau primele simboluri mnemonice pentru a transmite informații încă au fost, probabil, lipsite de conținut lingvistic direct. Aceste sisteme au apărut în perioada neoliticului timpuriu, încă din mileniul al VII-lea î.Hr >>                                                                                                    ——————————————————————-                                                                                  In literatura de specialitate se vorbeste de “Danubian script” si “Indus script”  .Am inteles ca termenul are legatura cu scrisul, dar nu am fost sigur asupra intelesului sau.       – “Script, a distinctive writing system, based on a repertoire of specific elements or symbols, or that repertoire”                                                                                                                – “handwriting as distinct from print; written characters.”                                                          – ” Însemnare, consemnare, relatare scrisă; text.”                                                                     Am vazut ca notiunea se aplica atat la insemnarile care constituie scris cat si la cele nedescifrate, despre care nu se stie exact in ce faza premergatoare a scrisului propriu-zis ar putea fi, ex. proto-scriere.                                                                                                         Lucrurile stand astfel, am tradus script prin “scriptura (manuscris, semne facute cu mana),=colectie de semne, insemne/insemnari”

NISTE INSEMNE, SAU O COLECTIE DE SEMNE, CUM SANT CELE ALE CIVILIZATIILOR INDUS SI VINCA TEORETIC AR PUTEA APARTINE UNEI UNOR STAGII PREMERGATOARE SCRISULUI , LA FEL DE BINE CUM NU AR PUTEA.                        PANA LA DEMONSTRATIA CLARA NU PUTEM AVEA VREO CERTITUDINE PENTRU NICIUNA DIN ALTERNATIVE.

================================================

DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES                                                   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing                                                                           A conventional “proto-writing to true writing” system follows a general series of developmental stages:

  • Picture writing system: glyphs (simplified pictures) directly represent objects and concepts. In connection with this, the following substages may be distinguished:
    • Mnemonic: glyphs primarily as a reminder.
    • Pictographic: glyphs directly represent an object or a concept such as (A) chronological, (B) notices, (C) communications, (D) totems, titles, and names, (E) religious, (F) customs, (G) historical, and (H) biographical.
    • Ideographic: graphemes are abstract symbols that directly represent an idea or concept.
  • Transitional system: graphemes refer not only to the object or idea that it represents but to its name as well.
  • Phonetic system: graphemes refer to sounds or spoken symbols, and the form of the grapheme is not related to its meanings. This resolves itself into the following substages:
    • Verbal: grapheme (logogram) represents a whole word.                                                            ———————————-
    • Syllabic: grapheme represents a syllable.
    • Alphabetic: grapheme represents an elementary sound
  • Cele cu maro apartin proto-scrierii, cu exemplu proto-scrierea sumeriana, care folosea semne proto-cuneiforme care aveau numai unul din atributele de mai sus, iar altele au inceput sa aiba asociate si sunete/foneme.
  • Cu albastru, scriere propriu-zisa ; ex scrierile Linear A si Linear B .  ===========================
  • Savantul Harold Haarman, precaut si in maniera inteligenta, stiind foarte bine ca nu poate fi vorba de scriere, foloseste termenul de “scriptura Vinca/Danubiana” (Vinca script si nu Vinca writing).                                                                                   Dansul in mod corect afirma ca daca avem o scriptura, gen colectie de semne nu inseamna neaparat ca nu este scris, dand exemplul scrierii Linear B, care inainte de a fi descifrata avea aspectul unei scripturi/colectie de semne.                                      Mai departe, a observat in mod corect ca multe din semnele din cultura Vinca sant semne elementare (gen V, I <.+, L, etc.etc.),
  • iar altele au la baza semne elementare  lineare, (aspectul general fiind ca multiple combinatii de semne lineare),
  •                                                                                                                                                           Din https://www.omniglot.com/writing/vinca.htm
  • Common symbols used throughout the Vinča period
  • iar altele au la baza semne elementare  lineare, (aspectul general fiind ca multiple combinatii de semne lineare).                                                                                              Other Vinča symbols
  • Nu sant sigur, dar retin si ma mir ca nu a folosit pentru acest tip de insemnari termenul consacrat  de “proto linear”.
    Din http://www.cclbsebes.ro › 03_IKKenanidis_ECPapakitsos                                                            An Interpretation of the Malia Stone Inscription in Terms of the …

    Cretan Protolinear script, which is considered herein as the
    original script that all the Aegean scripts evolved from. ”                                                                                                                                                                                                         Mai departe, dansul presupune in mod corect ca semnele aveau o semnificatie, presupune dansul (!)  cu preponderenta religioasa (!?).                                                              In continuare presupune ca este posibil sa avem de-a face cu o “scriptura nucleara” , unde un semn poate reprezenta un concept sau cuvant, dar  nu tot cuvantul , ci numai radacina lui. Ex. VORBim

  •                                                                                                                                                       Din An Introduction to the Study of the Danube Script
    Harald Haarmann and Joan Marler https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c6f7/3ede61269c8d4663f60a954cfbd1b946837b.pdf
  •                                                                                                                                                           << When an inscription consists of only one sign, this sign must express a single idea or, the most elementary independent unit of language, a
    whole word. This inductive identification is logical since any single sign with phonetic value (syllabic, segmental or alphabetic) would not express an independent linguistic unit and, thus, would not render a meaningful component of a message. In nuclear writing, only that part of a word (i.e., the stem) is rendered graphically which bears the elementary meaning. Nuclear writing is cumbersome because it requires a great interpretative effort on the part of the reader to specify the precise meaning of a text and to identify the exact contents of messages. For the reasons explained in the foregoing nuclear writing is by definition logographic.    …..The best known script based on this principle of nuclear (logographic) writing is the system of Sumerian pictography, the predecessor of cuneiform writing. Nuclear writing is the principle which governs the sign compositions in the oldest clay tablets from the cultural strata of Uruk III and IV, dating to between 3200 and 3000 BCE     …..The social functions of the Danube script, as far as they can be reconstructed from the archaeological record, point to a predominantly
    religious context. Religious functions dominate the early phase of literacy in the Danube civilization. In the course of time, the use of signs extended to also encompass the sphere of everyday life>>
  • Din
    https://www.aclweb.org/

     

  •                                                                                                                                                    Deci Dl. Haarman presupune ca ar putea fi vorba de proto-scriere, ca si cea sumeriana gresit numita pictografica, de fapt proto-cuneiforma, dar nici dansul si nimeni altcineva din lume nu a putut face dovada ca face parte dintr-o asemenea faza premergatoare scrisului.      Si nici dovada clara a functiei semnelor in domeniul religios si al vietii zilnice.
  • Aici, Dl. Haarman in loc sa explice cum si de ce nu este proto-scriere alege sa sustina ca poate fi o folosire a semnelor intr-un script chiar fara descifrare, dar gaseste motive si explicatii de conjunctura, de ce nu poate fi descifrata:
  •                                                                                                                                                          << 7. How to Make Progress with the Decipherment of the Danube Script?
    As outlined earlier (see under 2), a positive identification of sign use in the Danube
    civilization as a script is possible even without a successful decipherment. This analysis of the sign inventory and its composition, the artifacts and their inscriptions and the resemblances with other ancient writing systems has, hopefully, provided insights into the early experiment with writing in Southeastern Europe.                                                                                                                                            At the moment, it is doubtful whether significant progress with the decipherment can be made since bilingual and digraphic texts do not exist. In the absence of a “Rosetta Stone”—the item that made possible the breakthrough in the decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphs in the 1820s (Champollion 1825)—the prospects to ever crack the code of the Danube script seem minimal.There are certain conditions of the cultural embedding of the Danube script and its literacy
    which, seemingly, pose unsurmountable problems to a successful decipherment:
    o The scarcity of longer texts which would allow for a computational approach to identify frequencies and group patterns of signs in inscriptions;                                    o The appearance of multifunctional signs which may represent a script sign but are also integral components of religious symbolism (e.g., the cross sign, the V
    sign, the lozenge and the meander). Although it is highly improbable that we might
    ever be able to read entire inscriptions in the Danube script we may well know more about its social functions and about formulaic patterns of its sign use. Progress may also be expected from an analysis of signs and their groupings
    according to their appearance on certain objects, such as cult vessels, spindle-whorls, sculptures and ceramics, thus facilitating the distinction
    between writing and other notational systems (e.g., numeration, calendrical information, weights and measures, and heraldic emblems as markers of social groups). All these systems interacted in a sophisticated network of communicatiotion in the ancient Danube civilization. >>
  • =============  E X P L I C A T I E  ================
  • Sumerienii, dupa ce initial au folosit “margele” (conuri, discuri, etc.) din lut care semnificau produse :
  • Din https://www.usu.edu/markdamen/1320Hist&Civ/chapters/16TOKENS.htm
  • le-au inlocuit cu semne care le reflectau forma.   Apoi la scurt timp au mai adaugat pictograme si ideograme care prin forma semnificau realist semnificatul.
  •  Apoi la scurt timp au mai adaugat pictograme si ideograme care prin forma semnificau realist semnificatul.
  • Exemple;  Din https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html
  • A, “apa” SAG, “cap” Sze/Se “cereale,orz”                      Apoi semnele au inceput sa semnifice si idei,cuvinte
  • AMAR ,”vitel”
  • si sa devina mai complexe.Pe parcurs unor semne li s-a uitat semnificatia initiala.
  • numere: https://sites.utexas.edu/dsb/tokens/the-evolution-of-writing/
  • 23″                                                                                                           (Fig. 2) Impressed tablet featuring an account of grain, from Godin Tepe, Iran
  • DACA SUMERIENII AU PORNIT DE LA NECESITATEA NUMARARII SI DISTRIBUIRII PRODUSELOR SI SEMNELE AU INCEPUT PRIN A FI PICTOGRAFICE, ACESTE PRIME SEMNE AU CONSTITUIT STRUCTURA PE CARE S-AU DEZVOLTAT APOI CELELALTE. IN FINAL S-A AJUNS LA CUNEIFORME, CARE AU UN CARACTER “DIGITALIZAT” (FIIND FORMATE DIN LINIUTE).                                                                                                                                                                                                                             IN “SCRIPTUL VINCA”, S-A PORNIT DIRECT DE LA SEMNE ELEMENTARE LINIARE SI NU AU EXISTAT NUCLEE SEMANTICE PRACTICE PRECUM PICTOGRAMELE IN JURUL CARORA SA SE STRUCTUREZE, CA MAI APOI SA DEVINA COMPLEXE.                        SEMNELE ELEMENTARE AVAND PROBABIL O SEMNIFICATIE, NU AU PUTUT ULTERIOR, PE PARCURS SA REORGANIZEZE /REARANJEZE SEMNELE COMPLEXE PENTRU A OBTINE UN GEN DE IDEOGRAME (ASEMANATOARE CELOR CHINEZESTI).                                                                                                                              P.S. La cele chinezesti ideogramele nu au legatura cu sunetele sau limba.
  • ==============================
  • Inteleg ca aceste incercari legate de scris au incetat la un moment dat:
  • Din https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c6f7/3ede61269c8d4663f60a954cfbd1b946837b.pdf
  •    <<  The Danube script was successful as well although its continuity into later periods is still a matter of dispute. The ancient tradition of literacy on the continent ends about 3200 BCE (Owens 1999: 117). There are traces of a decaying writing system and of a notational system in the early third millennium BCE on the
    Greek mainland (Haarmann 2002b: 17 ff.). Literacy shifts to the Aegean. The earliest evidence for Linear A in Minoan Crete dates to around 2500 BCE.   >>

Domnul H.Haarman, sustine ca scriptul Danubian a fost sursa de inspiratie pentru scrierile Egeene. Eu nu subscriu. Sant de parere ca scrierile sumeriana proto-cuneiforma si Feniciana au fost sursa scrierilor Egeene.                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Ex. ce inseamna proto-Linear:                                                                                                       Cretan Protolinear Script: The Sixth-Vowel Set of Syllabograms Ioannis K. Kenanidis https://j.ideasspread.org/index.php/ilr/article/view/46

  •                                              ! A T E N T I E
  • TABLITELE DE LA TARTARIA NU FAC PARTE DIN CULTURA VINCA, CULTURA CARE A INCETAT (5700–4500 BC) CU MULT INAINTE DE A FI INSCRIPTIONATE.
    Nicaieri pe tot globul nu exista nici cea mai mica urma de proto-scriere inainte de 3.500 B.C. ! Daca cineva ar ssustine (inca) o vechime de sa zicem 5.300 B.C. ar fi o gogomanie putin mai mica decat ceea de a sustine ca oamenii au fost contemporani cu dinozaurii (in schimb scara proportiei temporale este asemanatoare) ******************************************
  • DOMNULE HAARMAN !
  • Initial v-am suspectat ca dumneavoastra vreti sa va sustrageti (evaziune, eludare) folosind termenul de script. Pentru a nu face apropierim trimiteri si comparatii directe cu scrierea sau proto-scrierea. Spuneti ca scriptura/insemnele Danubiene ar fi un “scriptura nucleara”, ca scrierea pictografica sumeriana. Probabil trebuie sa va reamintesc ca sumerienii nu au folosit niciodata chiar nici la inceputuri numai pictograme. De la inceput au folosit semnele proto-cuneiforme din care unele erau pictograme iar altele logograme si ideograme. Cu aceste semne au realizat proto-scriere, cu care reuseau sa transmita mesaje, adevarat la modul general.                                                                                                                                                                  Exemplu de proto-scriere sumeriana (cum o denumiti Dv. “pictografica”)                          Chiar aici aveti exemplul numarului 1 care nu este pictograma ci IDEOGRAMA, deci chiar de la inceput nu a fost scriere pur pictografica):
  •                                                                                                                                                       Din Writing systems; signed and spoken language. Language and thought.
  • http://exclusivohumanos.com/Ling%20001/Ling%20001%20Lecture%2011%20Writing%20language%20and%20sign%20language_%20Language%20and%20thought.htm
  • Such early documents are difficult to interpret, largely because they lack indication of verbs and the interrelations of nouns — precisely what full language excels at. The meaning might be                                                                                                           “two sheep received from the temple of Inanna”, or “two sheep delivered to the temple of Inanna”, or perhaps something else entirely.
  • Deci 2 ,templu!nu casa, oaie, zeitate, Inanna
  • Putem doar deduce aproximativ, fara a avea ceritudine:
  • ” ?date?primite?2 oi  ?pentru sacrificiu? templul ze-itei Inanna
  •                                                                                                                                                        Aratati-mi un singur exemplu privind o succesiune de semne din “scriptura Danubiana”, oricat de scurta din care sa se poata extrage un mesaj ori un inteles.
  • Aratati-mi un singur exemplu in sprijinul ipotezei Dv. ca semnele erau folosite cu preponderenta in domeniul religios (chiar daca nu explicitati mesajul/intelesul)
  • Din
    ontogenyphylogenyepigenetcs.wordpress.com › 2010/07/13 › rebutta…                         Rebuttal of Sproat, Farmer, et al.’s supposed “refutation” by …

  • “The Vinca markings on pottery are linear but scholars have established that the symbols do not appear to follow any order – the system thus can be expected to fall in the maximum entropy range (MaxEnt) in the above figure.”
  • Deci gradul de dezorganizare=entropie se apropie de maxim pentru scriptura Vinca (grupul acela de linii in culori pastel reprezinta limbi si scrieri cunoscute si au grad de dezorganizare=entropie mai mica)
  •                                                                                                                                                    Din  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vin%C4%8Da_symbols                                                                                      Analysis
    Most of the inscriptions are on pottery, with the remainder appearing on ceramic spindle whorlsfigurines, and a small collection of other objects. The symbols themselves consist of a variety of abstract and representative pictograms, including zoomorphic (animal-like) representations, combs or brush patterns and abstract symbols such as swastikas, crosses and chevrons.                                          Over 85% of the inscriptions consist of a single symbol.                                               Other objects include groups of symbols, of which some are arranged in no particularly obvious pattern, with the result that neither the order nor the direction of the signs in these groups is readily determinable.                                 The usage of symbols varies significantly between objects: symbols that appear by themselves tend almost exclusively to appear on pots, while symbols that are grouped with other symbols tend to appear on whorls.
  • The Jiahu symbols found carved in tortoise shells in 24 Neolithic graves excavated at JiahuHenan province, northern China, with radiocarbon dates from the 7th millennium BC. [25] Most archaeologists consider these not directly linked to the earliest true writing.[26]
  • The Dispilio Tablet of the late 6th millennium may also be an example of proto-writing.
  • The Indus script, which from 2600 BCE to 1900 BCE was used for extremely short inscriptions.>>

Even after the Neolithic, several cultures went through an intermediate stage of proto-writing before they used proper writing. The “Slavic runes” from the 7th and 8th centuries AD, mentioned by a few medieval authors, may have been such a system. The quipu of the Incas (15th century AD), sometimes called “talking knots,” may have been of a similar nature. Another example is the pictographs invented by Uyaquk before the development of the Yugtun syllabary for the Central Alaskan Yup’ik language in about 1900. >>

Latest opinion about Tartaria tablets /26Dec19

December 27, 2019

In the last time an apparent contradiction bothered me :                                                               –  In what circumstances happened, and who was, who knew so many proto-cuneiform sumerian-like signs, and using writing  wich is not proper/as usual sumerian.           This could be the result of and local adapted writing wich distance from that sumerian-one, and/or due to poor level/ writing skills of the scribe ?                 ———————————————–                                                                                                                  LATER_TIME SIGNS ? LOCAL ADAPTATIONS ?                                                                            Along with a overwhelming majority of sumerian signs, some (very few ~2) seem to be of later time, as                                                                                                                             From http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html

        From https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html                                       – The “H-like“, (left), proto-cuneiform-like sign “Ku“=”to base, found, build; to lie down ”    wich on tablet is rather/much close to Aegean PA3 and canaanite/paleo-hebrew Chet/Heth ?

                                                                                                                                     – The “D-letter” sign although not attested in writing, so allmost absent in proto-cuneiform, and found later in close shape in canaanite (dalet) and archaic greek “D“.         I realised that:                                                                                                                                        As writing processus began and originated & invented in Sumer (3.200-3.000 B.C.) followed in Europe by Aegean-script (2.200-1.500 B.C.), Tartaria tablets signs have surely an southward or eastern origin.                                                                                                       I tried to explain myself how and when the scribe could have access to proto-cuneiform signs.                                                                                                                                                          As research of sumerian proto-writing begun only after 1800-1900 and no one of such very old tablets were unearthed before, I thought even to the posibility of a modern-time origin…                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       From https://www.thoughtco.com/proto-cuneiform-earliest-form-of-writing-171675         “Proto-cuneiform writing was first identified on nearly 400 impressed clay tablets found in the sacred temple precinct of Eanna in the southern Mesopotamian city of Uruk. These were found during the early 20th century excavations by C. Leonard Woolley, and first published in 1935″                                                                                                                            ….such as archaic greek alphabets time. But  by that time (1000?-300 B.C.) the proto-cuneiform signs were allready forgotten even in Sumer.                                                             These above-mentioned signs were used in Aegean first as sign PA3 and second not in exact shape but close in Linear B as for “moon” and volume unit (0,8Liter).                 Many other sumerian proto-cuneiform signs apperead in Aegean and are prezent on our tablets. As Mr. E,Papakitsos and I.Kenanidis showed in their papers there is an “sumerian filum” (filiation) pointing to an Sumerian origin. In my posts, I revealed more signs and in much extension and detail than above mentioned authors this phenomenom.                                                                                                                                                                             The possible explanation of proto-cuneiform sumerian “Ku“-like sign, “deliver,eat” is :        – its changed shape toward canaanite & paleo-hebrew similar soundingCh“(chet,heth) From https://www.minimannamoments.com/back-to-the-future-past/         Image result for letter chet,              with the meaning same as Ku ?,or                                                                                                           – an adaptation to Aegean, cretan hierogliphic/Linear A , PA3-like sign, “all“.        From https://www.slideserve.com/devika/the-civilization-of-the-greeks-1-minoan-2-mycenae-3-dark-ages

Image result for filum of cretan hieroglyphics

The “D-letter” sign could be an adaptation of the Mrs. Besserat’s sumerian proto-cuneiform sign for volume (very very old 3200BC!) ,or:                                        https://russkiy.fun/ele/writing/

– taken and present in Aegean, micenaean- Linear B, also for volume (0,8Liter), or prezent in Aegean as for “month”                                                                                                               Images from  https://linearbknossosmycenae.com/category/lessons-linear-b/

Image result for linear A writing units  "month sign"Image result for linear B writing units  "month sign"

Image result for Linear B measures year "month"

I some oldest possible writing sistems “D-letter” shape was used in numeration, e.g.: – proto-cuneiform sign for kind of pot=volume unit? (3.500-3.200B.C., see D.S.Besserat), and                                                                                                                                                            – later, (3.200 B.C.) for numbers (1/60 but imprinted!), and  also in proto-elamite              – in close shape for “ninda”=”cereal, bread portion“,                                                                 – egyptian sign “T“(horizontal position) “loaf of bread” and                                                 – Aegean numeration sistem of time (year, month) and volume (Lin.B ;0,8 Liter).    So “D-letter”-shape in my opinion was devised for economical purpose                                          ——————————————-                                                                                             QUASI-SUMERIAN”, NOT ORIGINAL/GENUINE SUMERIAN PROTO-WRITING   !!                                                                                                                                                                                                          If/despite overwhelming majority of signs are sumerian, and no other writing system is fitting better, there are many aspects wich are distancing the tablets from proper sumerian proto-writing begining with the signs and continuing with the technique of writing. So top-level scientist A.A.Vaiman not consider the tablets genuine sumerian, but “”Quasi-sumerian”                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                From A. A. Vaiman.On the Quasi-Sumerian tablets from Tartaria http://www.archeo.ru/izdaniya-1/archaeological-news/annotations-of-issues/arheologicheskie-vesti.-spb-1994.-vyp.-3.-annotacii                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ” In 1963 N.VIassa published a paper with a description of three baked clay tablets which were found during his excavations in Tàrtâria, Transylvania, Roumania (figs.1-3). On one of them (fig.l) a tree is depicted with two animals standing on its sides. The researcher compared this representation with the impression of a Sumerian seal. Two other tablets (figs.2,3) carry signs, many of which, according to Vlassa, are either identical with, or very similar to, those inscribed on the tablets from Uruk IV (early Proto-Sumerian script). The sensational find has gained a wide publicity. The most significant paper that has appeared so far is that by А.Falkenstein who has basically supported Vlassa’s conclusions. Falkenstein has compared the Tàrtâria tablets with those from layer III in Uruk and Jemdet-Nasr (late proto-Sumerian script) using a number of criteria, such as clay, format, stylus, structure of the text, signs. He has proved beyond doubt that the script of the Tàrtâria tablets had been directly influenced by the proto-Sumerian script.     ……                                                                                                                                                            It has already been mentioned that not just the signs (possibly all of them) were borrowed, but other things as well, including the material for writing, the rectangular or round shape of the tablets (the latter occurs, although rarely, in layer IV of Uruk), the manner in which the text is divided into parts by means of vertical and horizontal incisions, and the technique of writing. However, the borrowed elements are transformed in such a way that one should speak of an independent Tartarian script rather than of a Tartarian version of the proto-Sumerian script. First and foremost, people who created this script, in contrast to the Sumerians, used only knife-shaped styluses.                                                                                                                  ………..                   The Tartarian script differs from the proto-Sumerian one also in the construction of the texts   ……                                                                                                                                         As it has been stated above, such a construction is not possible for the proto-Sumerian texts, in which just one line would suffice. Horizontal incisions on Tartaria tablets are situated directly under the signs of the top lines, which is never the case on the proto-Sumerian tablets.                             …..                                                                                        Certain important differences between the Tartarian script and the proto-Sumerian one are related to the orientation of various elements.         ……..                                                           While in proto-Sumerian texts the higher-order digits are placed above the lower-order ones, making up a column, in tablet 2, II 1, of Tartaria (fig.2) higher-order digits are situated to the left of the lower-order ones, making up a line.               …….                                        The abundance of numerals on the tablets indicates that the latter were economical documents. The meaning of the numerals and of some other signs may be quite safely established by the meaning of their Sumerian prototypes.   …..   there is a row of numerals: 600, 60, 10, 10                                ….                                                                                So the tablets described attest to the existence in Tartaria of an original script based on prolo-Sumerian prototypes. The belief that this script was invented prior to the proto-Sumerian one and influenced it, is totally unfounded.     ……                                                       Because the Tartaria signs derive from early proto-Sumerian ones present on tablets from Uruk layer IV, the Tartaria script apparently emerged in the last quarter of the 4th Millennium ВС. Nothing definite can be said as to where it was invented, but this hardly happened in Transylvania. More likely, its homeland was an area closer to Iraq. Functionally, the tablets were obviously economical documents. “  *************************                                                                                                              AN UNCOMMON, PUZZLING, WEIRD ASPECT, NOT NOTICED YET, BY ANYBODY, IS THAT OUT OF ENTIRE SIGN-LIST USED AROUND 3.000 B.C. THE SCRIBE DECIDED !?                  TO SELECT :                                                                                                                                             – PURE PICTOGRAPHIC SIGNS ON UNDRILLED OBLONG TABLET                                             – THE PICTOGRAPHIC-LIKE SIGNS AND PUT ON OBLONG TABLET WITH HOLE,                 – AND IDEOGRAMS/SYLLABOGRAMS (eg: As, Ku ,Pa, etc) ON THE ROUND TABLET                                                                                                                                                                                           (If I want now to explane in a quick way, to an youngster or average-level audience the ancient evolution and writing principles, I would proceed exactly in the same way !!)                                                                                                             *************************************

BECAUSE upon my study, ALL THE SIGNS ON THE TABLETS WICH ARE FOUND IN AEGEAN SCRIPTS ARE ALSO FOUND IN SUMERIAN PROTO-CUNEIFORM                                                                         BUT REVERSE NOT:                                                                                  ALL THE SIGNS ON THE TABLETS WICH ARE FOUND IN SUMERIAN PROTO-CUNEIFORM ARE NOT FOUND ALL IN AEGEAN SCRIPTS!                                                           I come to the conclusion that THE SIGNS ARE Much CLOSE TO SUMERIAN PROTO-CUNEIFORM, than to Aegean script ,and as SEEM TO ENCOUNTER PROTO-WRITING,         SIGNS MUST BE NOT “READ” BUT “INTERPRETED” UPON OR CLOSE TO THE SUMERIAN MEANINGS !                                                                                                                                  ….but remain to be discussed/argue if upper-half signs on round tablet wich seem, or  could be a later developement are an local (Aegean!) adaptation of those sumerian-ones.                    so, mainly:                                                                                                                                   IF we had on the tablets Cretan hieroglific or Linear B script, we could expect a kind of proto-greek language WICH IS NOT THE CASE !.                                                                   – the long eared-head sign is sumerian calf but rather goat than Aegean  “Ma” ?;             (Ma comes from sumerian aMAr,”calf”)                                                                                            – we have rather sumerian “Ku” than Aegean “PA3” ? ….and so on.                                          – the sequence ” +++++                                                                                                                           D D o o ” must be maybe interpreted :                                                                                         AsSar volum-ration 10 10            or,                                                                                           As-Sar (Deity) 60 10 10

Signs, http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html       are complex ideograms,                                                          – left: – “eschara/sacrificial/incense altar” and                                                                                – right, “sun-god(ess?) adobe”                                                                                                         My throughly observations aglutinate toward                                                                               – an older age (3.000-2.700) and “genuine sumerian mark/markings” and                                  – NOT, or less to an Aegean adaptation (wich begun in Cretan hieroglific ~ 2.500-2.200 B.C. ; D-shaped signs not used until Linear B)

Opinion of one of the first 5 top level scientists in life wich has expertise in the field of sumerian proto-cuneiform field (Ignace Gelb):

Ignace Gelb
American-Polish historian
Image result for "i.j. gelb" Ignace Jay Gelb was a Polish-American ancient historian and Assyriologist who pioneered the scientific study of writing systems. Wikipedia
BornOctober 14, 1907, Tarnow, Poland

From    Western-Pontic Culture Ambience and Pattern: In memory of Eugen Comsa Lolita Nikolova, Marco Merlini, Alexandra Comsa · 2016 · Social Science                                                                                                                                                                             << Gelb attributed the tablets to Sumerian traders familiar with writing, or to an unknown inhabitant of Transylvania who had a vague idea of Sumerian documents and mimicked them >>

From TARTARIA AND THE SACRED TABLETS.pdf | Pottery … – Scribd https://www.scribd.com › document › TARTARIA-AND-THE-SACRED-TA…

<<…… Gelb denied any Jemdet Nasr script on the Transylvanian tablets.>>

                                                                                                                                                                Note                                                                                                                                                         The interpretation of all signs inscribed on all 3 tablets, remain those allreaddy posted on pages: “Squared Tartaria tablet reading”, “”Round tablet sumerian reading” and also critics articles on A.A.Vaiman, Rumen Kolev, M.Merlini and others interpretations ! 

IF MOST OF THE SIGNS (80-90%) ARE OF SUMERIAN ORIGIN, AND OTHER SCRIPTS NOT FIT/MATCHING AS WELL, ONE COULD MAKE THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE WRITING IS SOME-HOW KNOWN.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 REGARDING THE LANGUAGE, I AM NOT AS SHURE. COULD BE SUMERIAN.             BUT ALSO COULD BE THE CASE SAME AS WRITING AKKADIAN WITH SUMERIAN CUNEIFORMS, OR MUCH CLOSE TO OUR CASE, USING THE  PROTO-CUNEIFORM SIGNS FOR AN (UNKNOWN YET) MINOAN LANGUAGE SPOKEN IN CRETE.                                   ANY CASE, WE ALL ARE EXPECTING AN AGGLUTINATIVE LANGUAGE, OF TYPE Ba-Na-Na language, A-Sa-Sa-Ra-Me..)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               A GOOD START OR EXAMPLE COULD BE THE HIPOTHESIS OF MR. PAPAKITSOS OF USING SUMERIAN-INSPIRED SIGNS (Linear A) TO WRITE A LOCAL, MINOAN ( YET UNKNOWN FOR SURE ) LANGUAGE.

A GOOD NEWS IS THAT:                                                                                                              PROTO-CUNEIFORM SIGNS NOT CARRY  A PROPER WRITING (not expressing through phonetics/phonemes the words of a given language ) the writing sistem is ideo-phonetic, and through pictures and ideograms we obtain a general image, understand the idea of the message even if not sufficient clear. 

SO ONE COULD MAKE AN APPROACH TO THE MESSAGE, WITHOUTH REGARD/IRESPECTIVE OF THE MOTHER LANGUAGE OF THE SCRIBE/USED !                     ================================================                                                            Excerpts from latest paper I read, wich convinced me for a Levantine? Anatolian, Aegean-Crete?, but of ultimate Sumerian origin for the signs, (and not necessary the same for the tablets ).

An Application of Systems Science in Humanities:                                                                 Investigating the Origins of the Minoan Civilization Evangelos C. Papakitsos University of West Attica, Greece  https://www.sumerianz.com/pdf-files/sjss2(4)33-44.pdf

<<Abstract
The present preliminary study investigates the indirect evidences about the origins of the Minoan civilization and those settlers that initiated the relevant development process, based initially on linguistic evidences. According to the latter, it has been demonstrated in other studies that by using the rebus principle, every sign of the Aegean scripts of Bronze Age renders a phonetic value that corresponds to the equivalent (Archaic) Sumerian word for the depicted object by this sign. In many cases, this equivalence is also pictorial, related to the Sumerian pre-cuneiform writing. Thus, to demonstrate also that there is absolutely no reason for excluding the Sumerians from the overall debate about the origins of the Minoan civilization, indirect evidence other than linguistic are organized and presented in a systemic manner, by using the conceptual tool of the Organizational Method for Analyzing Systems. ……………………..                                                                                                                                    1.2.1. Linear B Syllabary                                                                                                                ………  using the rebus principle, it has been demonstrated beyond statistical doubt that the creating language of LB signs (consisting of abstractly depicted objects) is a dialect close to but simpler than Archaic Sumerian (Kenanidis and Papakitsos, 2013a), since the phonetic value of every sign corresponds to the equivalent monosyllabic Sumerian word for the depicted object. According to Fischer (2004), the rebus principle that had been invented by the Sumerians is a gift of them to human kind, whose linguistic influence expanded to Iran, Nile, Indus Valley and (maybe) to Balkans (Kenanidis, 1992). In some occasions, the sign of the depicted object is identical to the equivalent Pre-cuneiform or Proto-cuneiform one (Kenanidis and Papakitsos, 2013a;2015; Papakitsos and Kenanidis, 2015.   ………….                                                                     1.2.2. Linear A Syllabary                                                                                                                        ………………..since the middle of the 3rd millennium BCE, and that “It can be assumed that the hieroglyphic script was partly derived from the older repertory of linear signs …” (Haarmann, 1996). This is an indirect reference to CP through LA. Scholars have made long and laborious efforts to reveal the languages that have been conveyed by LA scripts. There are several proposals about the underlying languages (Papakitsos and
Kenanidis, 2016), all of them reasonable considering that most of the suggested languages are very poorly known. Moreover, it is very probable that LA scripts had been used to express more than one spoken language of that era and area (Woudhuizen, 2008), just like the cuneiform script had been used as well to convey practically most of the languages of Near-East (Sumerian, Akkadian, Old Persian, Elamite, Hittite, Hurrian, etc.). Yet, the relevant proposals came to include even Proto-Kartvelian (Kvashilava, 2011;2016). A most recent study approaches the
decipherment of LA as a cryptographic problem (Patria, 2016). The novel concept is that the signs of the script (being syllabograms, ideograms or even both) were placed in a mixed manner, since the writing system (i.e., patterns) of LA was different than that of LB. The conveyed language is considered near to the Dorian Greek……….                 CV-type phonotactic is usually found in agglutinative languages, a feature that in LA has been ignored although observed very early by Duhoux (1998) and recently by Davis (2014) as well. Such a well-studied nearby agglutinative language of the 3rd millennium BCE were the Sumerian. Thus, instead of claiming that a very complex writing system had been intentionally devised, we may adopt a simpler explanation, according to the Ockham’s Razor principle (Rodríguez-Fernández, 1999), which is that
LA (and LB) script is a typical case of alloglottography (Rubio, 2006). According to the CP theory, the Sumerian scribes, who invented the original script, had to write in languages other than their own mother tongue, which can deduce that all the “non-Minoan” languages being written with LA/LB are quite distorted. It may also easily explain the nature of the spelling differences in words common to LA and LB, like qa-qa-ru/qa-qa-ro (Patria, 2016), since different scribes understood differently the sounds of another tongue.     …………
1.2.3. Cretan Hieroglyphics Syllabary                                                                              …………..Accordingly, the theory of the Sumerian origin of CP and consequently of CH is supported by 16 points of argument (Papakitsos and Kenanidis, 2016) plus one in
subsection 1.2.2 (Haarmann, 1996). In addition, Filippou (2014) argues for the common origin of the linear scripts (LA and LB) and CH, although in a different direction regarding the nature of the syllabary and the conveyed language (i.e., Greek).The Sumerian Origin Theory (henceforth SOT) provides interpretations of various CH
inscriptions so far (Papakitsos and Kenanidis, 2016), which are meaningful, coherent and of limited ambiguity.    ………..                                                                                                            1.3. Sumerian Origins Theory
To demonstrate that there is absolutely no reason for excluding the Sumerians from the overall debate about the origins of the Minoan civilization (SOT), indirect evidence other than linguistic will be presented in a systemic manner. Systems Science offers powerful conceptual tools that facilitate a holistic approach in the study of natural
and social phenomena (Luhmann, 1995; Parsons, 1977). A brief presentation of the utilized systemic methodology precedes the rest of the supportive evidence.  ……                2. Systemic Methodology
In order to connect the origins of the Minoan civilization to the Sumerian culture, linguistic evidence can be supplemented by a series of non-linguistic data that were gathered and organized, according to a particular systemic methodology originating from software engineering (Papakitsos, 2013), which is called Organizational Method for Analyzing Systems (OMAS-III). …….                                                                                              3.1.2. Strategic Raw Materials
The technology of the Sumerian society had well entered the Bronze Age. Copper was known since 4000 BCE (Clough and Rapp, 1979), while by 2300 BCE they also knew of iron too Keegan (1997). There were ploughs used, wheeled vehicles (chariots), pottery wheels, metallurgy furnaces, baked-clay products, sailing boats and of course
skillful craftsmen (Clough and Rapp, 1979). Thus, there was already a great need for strategic raw materialsthat were absent from Mesopotamia and had to be imported from distant locations,like Cyprus (for copper), India (for gold), Anatolia and Central Asia (for tin as well as timber and many other materials), Afghanistan (for turquoise,
lapis lazuli and other precious stones) and Europe (Keegan, 1997). This kind of transaction is much older as the gradually collected data suggest (Radivojević et al., 2014).    ………..                                                                                                                                          3.1.3. Commerce
Otherwise, commerce (see 3.1.2) requires a producer who knows the needs of a potential purchaser and a consumer who knows where to find the desired goods of a certain quality. This is an information exchange process that was conducted through human communication,with all the associated implications of such activity (see also section: 3.3 Geographical Evidence). Sumerians proved to be excellent traders and colonists throughout the entire Near-East, even at the end of the Uruk period (Algaze, 2005a), while the Bronze Age in Crete is supposed to have started in a significant scale at about 2700 BCE (Chaniotis, 2004; Roebuck, 1966)  ….                                                                               3.1.4. Politics
The referred period (3000-2700 BCE) had also been a transitional one regarding the organization of the Sumerian society. Kingdoms had not been fully established yet. The city-states were ruled by a council of elders that included the participation of women (Gannett, 1992; Jacobsen, 1939), who had a high social status analogous to that
of Minoan Crete, headed by a priest-king assisted by bureaucrats that had under their control large areas of fertile land (Keegan, 1997). Nevertheless, the lack of naturally protected borders (unlike Egypt) and the rise of the military power of city-states, like Uruk, led the Sumerian societies to a period of wars and to the substitution of priest-kings by military leaders(Keegan, 1997). Those socio-economic changes also resulted in the creation of a very wealthy class of officials (lords, priests, bureaucrats) and a very poor class of landless peasants (Clough and Rapp, 1979).
Because of the transition to the reign of dynasties, this time would have been ideal for the dissenters to leave, as social crises lead to immigration, also observed in the case of the Grand Ancient Greek Colonization (Manfredi and Braccesi 1997). …….                     3.2.2. Earliest Reports
Even before the era of Sargon, the earliest reports extend the rule of Sumerian kingdoms to the Mediterranean coast of Levant since the 28th century BCE, during the reign of Meskiaggasher, king of Uruk (Jacobsen, 1939). The same wide regional coverage appears during the reign of Lugalanemundu (2525-2500 BCE), king of Adab (Guisepi
and Willis, 2003)   …………                                                                                                                 3.3.1. Migration Routes
The genomic analysis of the European populations and the associated development of dairying practices indicate that Middle Eastern farmers gradually immigrated into Europe during the Neolithic Age, through Anatolia and Greece (Curry, 2013). This route has always been the closest one to Europe in any instance of historical agitation in Middle East, evident nowadays as well(Foskolou and Kyrimi, 2016). Immigration of a female farmer from Mediterranean to Scandinavia is also detected in Early Bronze Age too Nicholls (2012). The entire pattern attests that, at least in prehistoric times, innovations were propagated not as information but through the presence ofknowledgeable persons       ……………                                                                               3.3.2. The Island of Crete
Crete is located on this route (see 3.3.1) that
in the course of Bronze Age had been bidirectional (Barako, 2001;Landau, 2003; Sherratt, 1998; Thalassinos, 2004; Woudhuizen, 2006), while there is no particular reason to believe that this phenomenon had happened just once or twice per a few millennia. The island is fertile enough to sustain large populations and conveniently situated for international marine trade (Douvitsas, 2005), being the perfect destination not only for nearby settlers (Betancourt, 2003; Hayden, 2003; Pagkalou-Zervou, 1988) but also for persons of a most civilized nation of that era, like the Sumerians (Kenanidis and Papakitsos, 2013a). Moreover, it
had been a relatively safe place for longer times in history, compared to the constant raids of other peoples in Mesopotamia (see 3.1.4). The flora of the island in Bronze Age had been much richer than nowadays Kenanidis and Papakitsos (2013a) and capable of sustaining various species.    ………….                                                                                                    3.3.3. Commercial Routes
The commercial dispersion of the Sumerian influence had been initially determined by Kramer (1963), “… so that by the third millennium BC, there is good reason to believe that Sumerian culture and civilization had penetrated, at least to some extent, as far East as India and as far West as the Mediterranean, as far South as Ancient
Ethiopia and as far North as the Caspian”. The discovery of clay tablets in Margiana of Central Asia (Sarianidi, 1998), bearing signs of remarkable resemblance to those of CP, rather supports this aspect. India is 2000 km by sea from the ancient estuaries of the Euphrates or Tigris Rivers to the estuary of Indus River. Ethiopia is about 3700 km
from the same starting point to Aden Straights, sailing around the Arabic Peninsula. Especially for India, the influence of Sumerian pictography to Indus script is visible (Davis, 2011), whether this script is a true writing system (Fournet, 2012) or not (Farmer et al., 2004). The distance from the northern Sumerian territories to the northern coast of the Levant, traveling upstream the Euphrates River, is just 800 km (the curious reader can easily verify these routes by using the distance-calculating facility of a relevant program like Google-Earth). This route had been well-known to Mesopotamians, not only since the Uruk period (Algaze, 2005b; Sundsdal, 2011) but even before that, during the Ubaid period (Carter and Graham, 2010). After all, the classification of the Sumerian language as an r-Altaic one of the Proto-Bolgar branch (Kenanidis and Papakitsos, 2013a) and the anthropological data for the very first Sumerians, denoting people from Central Asia (Kyriakidis and Konstas, 1974c), indicate that the Sumerians had immigrated to Mesopotamia through Iran. By 3000 BCE, Sumer had been the center of a “global” trading (Giorgetti, 1977). The most important trading for the technology of Bronze Age was that of tin. Extensive trading networks existed for this purpose (Maddin, 1998; Valera and Valera, 2003). Other minerals and materials like amber were also important and their trading routs expanded from Scandinavia to Cyprus (Flemming, 2015; Kalle, 2015; Ling and Stos-Gale, 2015). Notably, commercial activity doesn’t include only an exchange of goods but also an exchange of information and potentially an exchange of delegations from experts or agents to evaluate the traded goods (see 3.1.3).  …….                                                                                                                       3.4. Maritime Technology (How)                                                                                                …………….Could the Sumerians have traveled as far as Crete? In the 1st millennium BCE, the Phoenicians traveled as far as Spain and beyond Gibraltar – they circled around
the whole Africa (Manfredi, 2004), having a similar naval technology to the one that is discovered through the shipwrecks of Mediterranean (Panousi, 2003). The Greeks had colonized the coasts from the Crimean Sea to Gibraltar as well, within a 2-3 centuries time (Manfredi and Braccesi, 1997), while Enthymemes explored the coasts of West Africa as South as Senegal and Pytheus described glaciers as North as Northern Norway (Manfredi and Braccesi, 1997). It may be argued, however, that all the above happened later than the Sumerian era. Yet, the Austronesians inhabited the entire Pacific Ocean, sailing for thousands of miles between remote islands, since 5000-2500 BCE and onwards (Gray et al., 2009; Pawley, 2002). Therefore more specifically:    …………….                                   3.4.1. Naval Vessels                                                                                                                                ………….. Nevertheless, Sumerians had attained the similar naval technology of sailing
ships to travel that distance from Levant to Crete, since the 35th century BCE (Guisepi and Willis, 2003). A sailing boat of those times could travel with an average speed of 8.5 km per hour (Johnstone, 1988; McGrail, 1981). In a day of sailing, a distance of 70-100 km could be covered (Manfredi and Braccesi, 1997). According to Homer (The Odyssey: XIV, 256-262), the trip from Crete to Egypt lasted five days. The distance from the northern Levant coast (e.g., Ugarit) to the eastern coast of Crete (e.g., Zakros) is about 880 km. With a favorable weather alongside the southern coastline of Anatolia, the Sumerian inhabitants of the Levantine communities (Rohl, 1999) could have arrived at Crete in just 9-13 days. The above estimated traveling times are precise if the supplies for such a journey are carried onboard. Otherwise, those supplies should have been gradually gathered from ashore: Cyprus, Southern
Anatolia and Rhodes.
3.5. Anthropological Evidence (Who)                                                                                                 There have been various attempts from scientists of many disciplines (archaeology; linguistics; anthropology) to identify the Minoans’ origins. Homer (The Odyssey: XIX, 172-180) mentions at least five ethnic groups (or subethnic in the case of Achaeans and Dorians), each one speaking its own language or dialect respectively (namely,
Achaeans, Eteocretans, Kydonians, Dorians and Pelasgians). Herodotus (Ι.173.1) mentions that in old times the entire Crete was inhabited by “barbaroi”, clearly meaning “foreigners” (i.e., non-Greeks; not “barbarians” in the modern sense of “savages”). Owens (2000) argues for the single nationality descent of the Minoan population
against Duhoux (1998), who mentions the above passage of Homer for justifying the multinational environment of prehistoric Crete. The debate of Owens is based on the population conditions of Crete at about the estimated time of having Odyssey written (800 BCE), which was indeed described as multinational. This debate, though, accounts
only for the Doric groups, the last ones to inhabit the island in ancient times (11th century BCE). For the rest of them, Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus preserved ancient narrations of Eteocretans (“True Cretans”), stating that they were the oldest inhabitants of the island, besides a group of more ancient and primitive people (“Idaean Dactyls”) and also mentioning those groups that inhabited the island after them (Driessen, 1998-1999; Kenanidis and Papakitsos, 2013b). suggests among other that Eteocretans were the Sumerian population, Kydonians were the Akkadian settlers and Idaean Dactyls were the previous Neolithic inhabitants of Crete. He also proposes a settlement of Sumerians in large numbers since 3000 BCE. The relevant anthropological data will be considered next (see 3.5.1-3), to examine in what extent they support or reject the SOT                                                                                                                                       4. Discussion
The entire linguistic context of Minoan (pre-Mycenaean) Crete seems to be closer to Near East than to mainland Greece, either in terms of the existence of multilingual societies (Morpurgo and Olivier, 2012) or regarding the influence on the creation of the scripts (Hood, 1971; Olivier, 1986). It is estimated that the beginning period of the
creation of CH and LA lies somewhere between 3000-2600 BCE (Olivier, 1986). This is the exact crucial period of socio-economic changes in the Sumerian societies that has been estimated previously (see 3.1.4). Thus, we are looking for a period of the Sumerian (Proto-) literate history that their writing system had become largely phonetic
(Guisepi and Willis, 2003) but it had not yet been developed into cuneiform (after 2600-2500 BCE), although the transition of the Sumerian script from curvilinear to proto-cuneiform had started since the 30th century BCE (Woods et al., 2010). At this stage, their original phonetic signs (approximately 600) could have been developed to a more compact and easy syllabic system, like CP, still without any influence or trace of cuneiform. Moreover, the Sumerian people of that period wouldn’t have been affected yet by the notorious sprachbund (Deutscher, 2007; Woods, 2006), namely the bilingualism with the Akkadian, since CP is simply an evolution of the Archaic Sumerian script (Kenanidis and Papakitsos, 2015), dating from 3100 to 2600 BCE (Kenanidis and Papakitsos, 2013a). Consequently, a suitable period of an arrival of the first Sumerian settlers at Crete can be defined between 2800-2600 BCE.
To summarize the presented socio-economic evidence, by the 26th and 27th centuries BCE the Sumerians had experienced:
 urbanization and overpopulation (see 3.1.1);
 the need for raw materials that were necessary for their advanced civilization but absent from Mesopotamia (see 3.1.2);
 (because of the previous need) the knowledge of an extended commercial network that was exploited, even well before this period (see 3.1.3);
 socio-economic changes accompanied by an increase of warfare and poverty for the lower classes (see 3.1.4).
Therefore by those times, the Sumerian socio-economic conditions were similar to those of the Greek city-states that triggered the Grand Ancient Greek Colonization of the 8th-6 th centuries BCE (Manfredi and Braccesi, 1997).
To summarize the geographical evidence, it is exhibited that extended networks existed since Neolithic Age, particularly in Balkans as well (Maran, 2008), through which people (see 3.3.1, 3.3.4), strategic raw materials, other goods and information traveled from Scandinavia at North to Ethiopia at South and from the British Isles at West to
India at East, having the center of this network at Mesopotamia (see 3.3.3). The oldest so far direct evidence of such travels by sea in the afore-mentioned commercial networks is approximately dated to 1300 BC, from the famous Ulu-burun shipwreck (Pulak, 2005) that contained 17 tons of materials from 11 different cultures (Marchant, 2012), including amber from Baltics and tin from Afghanistan (Manfredi and Braccesi, 1997). Crete had been a naturally and geographically privileged place on the center of the northwestern root of this network (see 3.3.2) that could be favorable for knowledgeable persons to settle.
5. Preliminary Conclusion
Considering the local (Mediterranean) origins of the Minoan inhabitants that have been found so far (see 3.5.1), the initial proposal about the settlement of Sumerian populations in large numbers(Kenanidis and Papakitsos, 2013a) is not anthropologically supported, at least not in the sense that entire families of Sumerians immigrated to Crete. What may have happened though is analogous to the Grand Ancient Greek Colonization, where the settlers were mostly unmarried men, getting brides from the local population after the settlement (Manfredi and Braccesi, 1997). This analogy justifies the anthropological evidence about the Minoans regarding both their maternal lineage of Neolithic European origin(see 3.5.2) and the observed assimilation by the locals of the settlers from the
“Iranian/Armenian-type” (Kyriakidis and Konstas, 1974b). The Ancient Greek settlers, although less in number but bearing an advanced culture, influenced in many and different ways their neighboring Romans (Manfredi and Braccesi, 1997) and Etruscans (Laparidou, 2002), or other indigenous populations, from the Egyptians (Trianti et
al., 2011) to the remote culture of Gandara in Eastern Afghanistan (Grigorakou Parnassou, 2004).Therefore, the SOT as expressed herein argues that the settlers from East that arrived in Crete during the 28th–26th centuries BCE(Douvitsas, 2005; Kyriakidis, 1971; Kyriakidis and Konstas, 1974b) were people of Sumerian
cultural background: merchants (knowing the routes), craftsmen (carpenters, metal-workers, seals-makers, etc.) and scribes(actually accountants and administration clerks) in moderate numbers. The advanced level of their civilization compared to that of the local Neolithic population could have easily resulted in the complete adoption of their culture by the locals, during the eight-centuries long (2700-1900 BCE) Prepalatial era. In this respect, more direct evidence are being accumulated to be presented shortly. ”                                                                                ==================================                                                                                              Pitty, Mr. Papakitsos and Kenanidis despite the fact that supposed that minoans were early sumerian migrants, not realised that they have in Tartaria tablets strongest possible  hard evidence available on Earth for their theory.   

  In my opinion, the tablets are surely genuine, and were inscribed by an sumerian early settler/migrant, (next generation folower?) from Ciclades? , Tartaria ?? , but much more sure Crete, or by an sumerian prospector. Possible in Vinca-C/Transylvania come kind of craftsmen-miners-metalurgists. The tablets were used by a little comunity or were of single-person use, to perform an offering ritual (goats and cereal/bread) to some deities.The pictographic tablet is kind of resume of all action.    =================================                                                                                       From Helmut Stumfohl Die Entstehung der Schrift und das Problem
der Vinca-Schrift
https://mdc.ulpgc.es/utils/getfile/collection/almog/id/80/filename/343.pdf                                                                                                                                                                                                    ” Eine mehr oder minder begrenzte Zahl von Bildern oder reinen Zeichen
gestattet beliebig viele Möglichkeiten auszudrücken: einer endlichen Zahl von
Zeichen steht eine
unendliche Zahl von Kombinationen des sprachlichen Stoffes gegenüber. …………..                                                                                                                             Die Tartaria-Täfelchen enthalten natürlich nicht alle Zeichen der VincaSchrift, aber alle Zeichen der Tartaria-Täfelchen sind in der Vinca-Schrift vertreten.”  

“Deciphering”; difficulties & implications / “Descifrarea”; dificultati si implicatii

November 29, 2019

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_writing#Developmental_stages                                                                                                                                                                                                In the history of how writing systems have evolved in different human civilizations, more complete writing systems were preceded by proto-writing, systems of ideographic or early mnemonic symbols (symbols or letters that make remembering them easier). True writing, in which the content of a linguistic utterance is encoded so that another reader can reconstruct, with a fair degree of accuracy, the exact utterance written down, is a later development. It is distinguished from proto-writing, which typically avoids encoding grammatical words and affixes, making it more difficult or even impossible to reconstruct the exact meaning intended by the writer unless a great deal of context is already known in advance.   
From https://pdfslide.net/documents/history-of-writing.html                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Developmental stages                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             A conventional “proto-writing to true writing” system follows a general series of developmental stages:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Picture writing system: glyphs directly represent objects and ideas or objective and ideational situations. In connection with this the following substages may be distinguished: The mnemonic: glyphs primarily a reminder; The pictographic (pictography): glyphs represent directly an object or an objective situation such as (A) chronological, (B) notices, (C) communications, (D) totems, titles, and names, (E) religious, (F) customs, (G) historical, and (H) biographical;                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      The ideographic (ideography): glyphs represent directly an idea or an ideational situation.                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Transitional system: glyphs refer not only to the object or idea which it represents but to its name as well.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Phonetic system: glyphs refer to sounds or spoken symbols irrespective of their meanings. This resolves itself into the following substages:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    The verbal: glyph (logogram) represents a whole word;                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                The syllabic: glyph represent a syllable;                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      The alphabetic: glyph represent an elementary sound.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Nota mea:                                                                                                                                                                     Sistemele ideografic si cel de tranzitie sant cele cu care ne confruntam in tablitele de la Tartaria !…. …..dar este posibil ca partial sa intram si in faza fonetica, in special in ceea ce priveste  jumatatea de sus a tablitei rotunde.

Textul in limba romana:                                                                                                                               Imaginea, din    http://www.serbia.com/visit-serbia/cultural-attractions/archaeological-sites/vinca-the-cradle-of-european-civilization/                                                                                                       Image result for old europe civilisation

Folosirea aici a termenului “descifrare” ar avea doar rolul de a augmenta un presupus aspect ascuns si ezoteric al unui artefact inscriptionat (si nu neaparat “scris”) si al mesajului purtat. De fapt in covarsitoarea majoritate a cazurilor, nu avem de-a face cu un mesaj criptat,                                                                                                                              (…asta le mai trebuia celor de demult pe langa dificultatile legate de scris, sa se chinuie sa-l mai si ascunda cripteze-incifreze).                                                                                         Cu modestie, trebuie sa spunem ca vorbim de incercari de interpretare si doar eventual de citire.                                                                                                                                                   —————————————————–                                                                                                   Totusi exista in domeniul paleografiei ceva apropiat de incifrare, in vin in minte cazurile tetragrammatonului (ebraic si grec), adica prescurtarea ascunsa a numelui zeitatii supreme, precum si simbolurile din perioada timpurie a crestinismului, cand crestinii erau prigoniti. Se pare ca nu-i  nici vorba de tetragrammaton aici!                            —————————————————–                                                                                                      Tablitele de la Tartaria ar intra in categoria cea mai grea a incercarii de citire a unui scris necunoscut, anume aceea in care nu se cunosc nici limba si nici sistemul de scriere. Daca s-a putut face putin de tot lumina in cazul scrisului, limba ramane necunoscuta. Chiar si daca ar ramane de exemplu numai limbile imediat apropiate, greaca, latina si traca, numarul cuvintelor rezultate in urma combinarilor intre x limbi si y semne este enorm.                                                                                                                            Cu  situatii asemanatoare s-au confruntat in trecut Michael Ventris si Beddrich Hrozny ( dintre care primul a descoperit limba miceniana si scrierea linear B iar celalalt limba si scrierea hitita.)                                                                                                                   Dar si in ziua de azi ne confruntam cu asemenea incercari de descifrari, si aici dau cu titlu de exemplu, numai pe acelea ale inscriptiilor elamite, Linear A si a discului de la Faistos. In cazul scrierii linear A, desi se cunoaste sistemul de scriere, in sensul ca 90% este similar scrierii linear B descifrate, exista o sumedenie de ipoteze in privinta limbii folosite. Nu se stie cu certitudine nici macar familia din care face parte. Cat despre discul de la Faistos, exista vre-o 15 incercari de citire, toate facute de cei mai reputati cercetatori, de nivel mondial si nu exista o convergenta de opinii a ceea ce este scris pe el. Cazul tablitelor de la Tartaria se apropie de aceste ultime doua exemple, cu atat mai mult cat dupa mine o parte din semne apartin unei perioade de timp apropiate.

Din Massimo Vidale, 2007, The collapse melts down: a reply to Farmer, Sproat and Witzel’, East and West,vol. 57                                           https://www.coursehero.com/file/p2kknbd/Massimos-arguments-are-convincing-in-the-context-of-Wanderworter-evidence-from/                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        << In order to decipher a lost writing system, you have to guess the language, guess the content, and you need relevant contexts on which independently and reasonably test your ideas…>>                                                                                                                                        traducere:                                                                                                                                                “ pentru a descifra un sistem de scriere, trebuie sa se depisteze limba, sa se depisteze continutul, si aveți nevoie de contexte relevante pentru care să vă testați ideile în mod independent și rezonabil” ….iar noi nu avem context relevant, nici alte texte, ci avem doar aceste tablite-unicat                                                                                                                               In privinta tablitelor de la Tartaria, exista incercari de interpretare folosind semnele sumeriene proto-cuneiforme (A.Falkenstein, A.Abramovici, R.Kolev si altii). Astfel au obtinut un gen de interpretare, pentru ca in stadiul proto-scrierii, adica al folosirii semnelor proto-cuneiforme, nu putem vorbi de scriere propriu-zisa ci doar de proto scriere.                                                                                                                                    Astfel nimeni nu a putut face dovada ca ar putea fi vorba de scris propriu-zis.                                                                                                                                                                  Imaginile, din  https://www2.uned.es/geo-1-historia-antigua-universal/ESCRITURAS_ANTIGUA/Escrituras_3__antiguas_BALKAN_DANUBE-SCRIPT.htm                                         Daca semnele pe doua dintre tablite par a fi foarte vechi, situatia este diferita la cea rotunda.De notat ca si o parte din savantii enumerati, ca si mine au observat ca semnele cumva “mimeaza” semnele proto-cuneiforme sumeriene si nu sant toate original sumeriene.                                                                                                                                          In plus fata de dansii, eu am accentuat faptul ca semnele reflecta o evolutie in timp prin aspectul lor mai “rafinat” si reflecta o evolutie in timp, fiind mult apropiate de semnele folosite in epoci ulterioare !        Exemplu de semne mai tarzii:                                                                                                                                                                                                      Din Alphabets of Asia Minor   https://tied.verbix.com/project/script/asiam.html                                                                                                                                             In mod natural si obiectiv, numarul combinatiilor posibile intre diferite limbi cuplat cu numarul mare de combinatii ale semnelor care genereaza idei si cuvinte este in final enorm.  

 From Helmut Stumfohl Die Entstehung der Schrift und das Problem
der Vinca-Schrift
https://mdc.ulpgc.es/utils/getfile/collection/almog/id/80/filename/343.pdf                                                                                                                                                                                                    ” Eine mehr oder minder begrenzte Zahl von Bildern oder reinen Zeichen
gestattet beliebig viele Möglichkeiten auszudrücken: einer endlichen Zahl von
Zeichen steht eine
unendliche Zahl von Kombinationen des sprachlichen Stoffes gegenüber. …………..                                                                                                                             Die Tartaria-Täfelchen enthalten natürlich nicht alle Zeichen der VincaSchrift, aber alle Zeichen der Tartaria-Täfelchen sind in der Vinca-Schrift vertreten.”    Asa incat daca initial am gresit punand stacheta la o inaltime la care nu numai ca nu pot ajunge eu, dar se pare si altii, acum sant nevoit nu sa ma resemnez ci sa inteleg despre ce este vorba cu adevarat.                                                                                                                                                           Obtinerea unui mesaj, interpretari ori in caz extrem text adevarat, unic si ultimativ este mai mult decat o iluzie                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Este demna de consemnat cercetarea Domnului Marco Merlini, extinsa si publicata in zeci de articole si carti, care desi a gasit toate semnele, doar disparat (!), in diferite locuri si scrieri din lume, nu a realizat ca folosind asemenea semne, in mai multe locuri in lume, s-a “cam” scris cu ele.                                                                                            Nu a putut face nici macar vre-un gen de conexiune legata de scris si a ajuns la concluzia socanta ca numai persoana care a inscriptionat semnele stia semnificatia lor, semnificatia lor fiind una de natura magica. Ba mai mult, dupa cate am inteles nici macar altii din alte comunitati chiar relativ apropiate, cum as zice “de peste dealnu puteau intelege acea semnificatie !

Acestea fiind spuse, va propun in plus un exercitiu de imaginatie:                                            – sa presupunem ca cineva, sau eu “gaseste” si publica aceasta versiune reala , care reflecta exact ce a vrut scribul in cap, de care nu stie nici autorul publicarii ca este cea reala. Rezultatul posibil ?                                                                                                                                     Ceilalti cercetatori vor veni unul dupa altul si din spiritul competitivitatii, de la inaltimea pozitiei lor academice vor demonta complet aceasta versiune, eventual incercand sa demonstreze ca a lor este buna si adevarata. Apoi mai intervine un aspect:                                                                                                                                                                     – Daca intradevar continutul este de natura mistico-religioasa, putem avea de-a face cu o incercare de comunicare a unui individ cu divinitatea.Aceasta comunicare, de o natura inefabila, nu poate fi descrisa si nici inteleasa fiind unica, particularizata persoanei, asa cum fiecare individ este unic. Ar insemna sa intram “cu picioarele” nu numai in mintea, dar si in sufletul lui. Ar fi poate un gen de violare si profanare atat a mesajului de adresare catre divinitate, cat si a intimitatii persoanei.

Daca ar fi vorba in extremis de o perioada a Culturii Vechii Europe, cu atat mai mult, cu cat acea societate pare a fi fost de factura edenica, negasindu-se arme cu care se puteau lupta intre ei sau cu altii, Asa incat se presupune ca am intra in lumea lor de o curatenie etica si morala, chiar noi aceia  provenind dintr-o societate partial “cariata”, sa nu zic depravata.Cu atat mai mult ar fi un gen de impietate. Asa incat neintrand in intimitatea si sufletul lor am da dovada de respect, in primul rand a memoriei si a ceea ce au fost si reprezinta pentru umanitate: unul din leaganele de baza ale civilizatiei pamantenilor actuali.                                                                                                                      ATENTIE:                                                                                                                                          Scrisul a aparut in Europa  in principal pornind din aria Egeeana.                                 Cel din aria Anatoliana (Luvian,Hitit) nu a fost asimilat sau folosit decat in Anatolia si nu s-a bucurat de succes,  nu s-a pretat la o utilizare larga sau practica.                                              Deci in principal scrisul a aparut in aria Egeeana. Originea ultima pare sa fi fost in Orient, Sumer. Sub influente din Anatolia (luviana) si aria Levantului (filistina).  s-a dezvoltat apoi  “local” (Creta).                                                                                                     Rezultatele au fost proto-scrierea Cretana hieroglifica, urmata apoi de scrierile Linear A si Linear B.                                                                                                                                         Din aria Egeeana scrierea s-a raspandit in toata aria Mediteraneana, (prin cea derivata cariana a ajuns si in Egipt) si apoi inspre nord in Balcani.                                       Asa incat a.  cea mai veche forma de scris gasita la noi indreptatit o putem suspiciona ca provine din sud, aria Egeeana/Creta.                                                                                         In plus constat o asemanare lingvistica intr o serie de limbi din spatiul Balcanic, ceea ce intareste ipoteza lingvistilor privitor la existenta unui initial continuum lingvistic Balcanic. Este vorba de limbile greaca, latina, italiana, albaneza, romana si poate si slava.

  EXPUNERE CU CARACTER DIDACTIC :

Referitor la continut, daca asteptarile se indreapta spre o mare vechime, atunci:                   Din A GRAMMAR OF MODERN INDO-EUROPEAN – Academia Prisca                                   “In Proto-Indo-European, simple sentences may be composed of only one word, a noun or a verb; as, God!, or (it) rains.                                                                                                            NOTE 1. Nominal sentences of this type are usually Interjections and Vocatives. Verbal sentences of this type include Imperatives (at least of 2nd P.Sg.) ”                             traducere:                                                                                                                                             << In Proto-Indo-Europeana, propozitiile simple pot fi compuse numai dintr-un singur cuvant, un substantiv sau un verb; ca siDoamne!“, sau “ploua”                                               NOTA 1. Propozitiile nominale de acest tip includ imperative (cel putin ale persoanei a II-a singular) >>                                                                                                                                    Ex. latina “da !” greaca :”dos/didou!” 

 Din  https://indo-european.info/WebHelp/7_verbs.htm                                                               << While the oldest PIE had possibly only indicative and imperative, a subjunctive and an optative were common in Late Indo-European, both used in the present, perfect and aorist. Not all dialects, however, developed those new formations further into a full system.  ……3. The imperative is used for exhortation, entreaty, or command. >>

  Din https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Italic_languag                                                      Third Conjugation                                                                                                                           << The bulk of Proto-Italic verbs were third-conjugation verbs, which were derived from Proto-Indo-European root thematic verbs. However, some are derived from other PIE verb classes, such as *linkʷō (PIE nasal-infix verbs) and *dikskō (PIE *sḱe-suffix verbs). Example Conjugation: *ed-e/o- (to eat)

Present Imperative Active Passive
2nd. Sing. *ede *edezo
2nd. Plur. *edete

>>                                                                                                                                                         Din    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E1%BC%94%CE%B4%CF%89                           ἔδω  (édō)  Etymology From Proto-Indo-European *h₁ed-                                                          Active, Imperative singular, 2-nd : ἔδε

In acelasi timp cu *h₁ed-   “mananca”, avem proto-albanez      

Din https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/edh                                                                                          << edh m (indefinite plural edhadefinite singular edhi, definite plural edhat)

  1. goat kid (under a year old)>>                                                                                                                           Aici am impresia ca sant cot la cot cu “scriitorul”, cumva la un pas in urma lui, uitandu-ma peste umarul lui. A facut absolut tot posibilul sa transmita un mesaj, respectiv “sa dai sa mananci”. A figurat pe tablita pictografica capara, ied, apoi a incercat sa scrie edh, ede. e dhi pe cea rotunda. A incercat sa reproduca stangaci gestul de a da pe tablita pictografica prin acea silueta ce pare umana cu maiinile intinse, apoi a incercat sa scrie “da, sa dai” la imperativ? didos, didou, dedou,                                                                                                                                         Din https://linearbknossosmycenae.com/tag/ionic-greek/
  2. didomi-linear-b-archaic-new-testament

 

Timpul in care au fost scrise  tablitele poate fi cuprins intre 2.700 I.E.N. si mergand pana in extrem la a fi de sute de  ani IEN                                                                                                    ======================                                                                                                                  In english:

The term deciphering” would bee used here, only to magnify the hidden and ezoteric character of the “written” artefact and coresponding message. In fact, most of ancient writings were not encriped, had practical use economical or religious ; the dificulties of writing-reading process was quite hard and  enough for them, so no need for encription. Then not deciphereing, but interpreting and reading attempts. But there is a situation which arise in my mind, that of tetragrammatons (hebrew and greek) wich was the hidden abbreviation of the true name of God. Also hidden messages of hunted early christians.

   The Tartaria tablets pertain to the hardest category of unknown writings, that in wich it is not known either the writing, nor the language. If the signs or writing was slightly lighted, the language remain unknown. With same difficulties were confronted in the past, Michael Ventris and Bedrich Hrozny, wich one of them discovered micenaean language and coresponding Linear B writing, and the other, the hittite language and writing. But every of them had at disposal tens of tablets, and Ventris changed opinions with Chadwick and Sir Arthur Evans. But we have even nowdays unknown writing systems and : ancient elamite, Linear A and Faistos plate. Many attempts were made; in the Linear A case, allmost all the signs are similar to Linear B ones, but for the language, even the linguistic family remain unknown. For Faistos disc/plate there are some 15 (!) reading attempts, but no one get general agreement. Tartaria tablets case is close to those above (the writing is even hard), in my opinion their age beeing close to Linear A/Faistos . There were some interpretation attempts, using sumerian proto-cuneiform signs (A.Falkenstein, A.Abramovici, R.Kolev and others). “Interpreting”, as the stage of using proto-cuneiform signs is a proto-writing stage, so it is no reading, nor true writing. So till now nowbody got the proof that Tartaria tablets carry true writing if using an sumerian approach.. Some say not carry.                                           Images, from https://www2.uned.es/geo-1-historia-antigua-universal/ESCRITURAS_ANTIGUA/Escrituras_3__antiguas_BALKAN_DANUBE-SCRIPT.htm                                                                                                                                                                            On two tablets, the signs show to have old shapes, bu for the round tablet the situation is different.The scientists noted, (me also) that the signs are a mimicry of that proto-cuneiform ones, there are no original sumerian signs. What I stressed and others not, it is the fact that the signs show  evolved shapes, close to other folowing stages of writing in the world.                                                                                                                                                                                  From Alphabets of Asia Minor https://tied.verbix.com/project/script/asiam.html 

From Massimo Vidale, 2007, The collapse melts down: a reply to Farmer, Sproat and Witzel’, East and West,vol. 57 https://www.coursehero.com/file/p2kknbd/Massimos-arguments-are-convincing-in-the-context-of-Wanderworter-evidence-from/                            << In order to decipher a lost writing system, you have to guess the language, guess the content, and you need relevant contexts on which independently and reasonably test your ideas…>>

Because the language is not known, so could be used different languages by one hand, and combining the signs in-between by the other hand, the number of resulting meanings and words alone beeing great also. These combined cause the final number of possible reading attempts of the tablets be highly great.

 From Helmut Stumfohl Die Entstehung der Schrift und das Problem
der Vinca-Schrift
https://mdc.ulpgc.es/utils/getfile/collection/almog/id/80/filename/343.pdf                                                                                                                                                                                                    ” Eine mehr oder minder begrenzte Zahl von Bildern oder reinen Zeichen
gestattet beliebig viele Möglichkeiten auszudrücken: einer endlichen Zahl von
Zeichen steht eine
unendliche Zahl von Kombinationen des sprachlichen Stoffes gegenüber. …………..                                                                                                                             Die Tartaria-Täfelchen enthalten natürlich nicht alle Zeichen der VincaSchrift, aber alle Zeichen der Tartaria-Täfelchen sind in der Vinca-Schrift vertreten.”  

If in the past  I rised the bar too much  high, aiming direct to a final reading (!?) now I understand what is all about in reality.    Obtaining an raw, unclear message beeing some-how possible, but                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       An original, true and ultimate interpretation (in extreme,message (or even more) a text) is much more than an illusion.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Worth to be noted, Mr. Marco Merlini, made an extensive reasearch on “Danubian writing” and Tartaria tablets, having tens of published papers and books. He found all the signs, but disparate, in different places and writings in the world. Not realised that most of them were used in different writings and others used them for writing. Any connexion related to writing made by him, getting to the shocking conclusion that only the writer knew the meaning of the signs !!, wich were not writing signs, but magic-ones . Even the other comunities members does not grasp the meanings. So I understand that people “over the hill” understood nothing.                                                    Mr. Merlini squeezed out not a  single meaning out of a pile of known signs from 3.200 B.C. onward .

That beeing told, I’m proposing you to imagin:                                                                                 – suppose that somebody even me, find and publish the real version wich it is reflecting what had the “writer” in mind, of wich the autor of the published article has no knowledge that is that-one true. The result? The other scientists pushing themselves in a hurry to completely demolish that variant, even trying that theirs is that true one.           Then another aspect:   

If indeed, the containt is one of religious-mystic nature, we could face that writer initiated to comunicate with God, to cast a prey or to ask for something. In this case, the mesage has an inefable nature, cannot be described or understood by others, cause it is particular to that unique person, as every is only in best case “like” the other. It is only “his” message. That means that we are entering, with bare feet, not only in his mind, but also in his soul. Could be kind of violation, and profanate either the divine-nature message but either the intimacy of that person.

                                                                                                       

If would be in extremis about the Old Europe Culture, the impiety would be greater, as long as that society was of edenic-nature ( were  found any warfare weapons).                 So we are entering an quite ethic and moral pure world, we,  wich are from a partly “decayed” world. Would be kind of impiety. So not entering in they’re intimacy, will be a token of evidence, of respect, in the first time for their memory and what they represents for humanity: members of the cradles of present earthlings.

Earliest writings in Europe appeared in Anatolia (eg. Luwian, hittite) and Aegean area (Cretan hierogliphic, Linear A and Linear B). Cuneiform writing got no much success out of Anatolia and died there, cause was hard to be used by average cultured people.                      Aegean writing minoan Cretan hieroglific and Linear A seem to have a filiation  to Eastern Sumer. But later alphabetic writing (not much related to Linear A/B), seem to emerged from an “hot pot” caused by intense comerce.            In the middle are phoenicians and philistines, (not clear if philisines originated in Crete or in Levant). Alphabetic writing not much related to Linear A/B, spread in entire Mediteranean area and beyond. In Balcan got from south. If want to see what kind of writing we have on Tartaria tablets, no need to google so far away to Sumer, the origin could be only in Aegean Sea (Crete).

I know this feeling that I am folowing the tablet’s writer closer and closer to only one step behind.The writer could be a native of Macedonia or Epirus. You know, proto romanians have a mixed past with albanians and maybe macedonians/aromanians. Cold be much more than a goat-herder or tradesman. He parciced kind of cultural and religious misionarism. But surely wanted hard and made considerable efforts to explain how writing works. Out of many testings on upper side of the round tablet, remain two main options:                                                                                                                                               – one wich contain Hera/Here/Hero on the left, and Divos/Deivos/Didou/rrok ? on the right                                                                                                                                                   – another contain ede/hede/ e dhi on left side and didou/didos on the right

The 1-st could be related to:                                                                                                Heros=Lord or Hera=lady and Divos=God or:                                                                    Heros, heroa/Hero=dead and Divos=divine or give (ofering), or                                                 Hera=time and rrok=grasp                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   2-nd could be related to:                                                                                                                         Ede,hede: “allraedy this”, *hed, ede,e dhi=the goat, edh=kid goat and didou/didos=give                                                                                                                                   (+++++ 5? 50? goats or  σε/σύ = you )                                                                                                                                                                                                  ==========================================                                                                        Our task is close to folowing (1,2,4,8)                                                                                                              8 Ancient Writing Systems That Haven’t Been Deciphered Yet BY ARIKA OKRENT  https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/12884/8-ancient-writing-systems-havent-been-deciphered-yet?fbclid=IwAR0QSWKVxjmRWw-9TeoTBv97pAyEILw1V0RJzliDeuiGdPG50N03t4g53v4

1. Linear A   2. Cretan Hieroglyphics 4. Sitovo inscription                                                                                                                                                                                                                       8. Proto-Elamite                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              This ancient writing system was used more than 5000 years ago in what is now Iran. Written from right to left, the script is unlike any other ancient scripts; while the proto-Elamites appear to have borrowed the idea for a written language from their Mesopotamian contemporaries, they apparently invented their own symbols—and didn’t bother to keep track of them in an organized way, proto-Elamite expert and Oxford University scholar Jacob Dahl told the BBC in 2012.                                                Around that time, he and his Oxford colleagues asked for help from the public in deciphering proto-Elamite.                                                                                                             They released high-quality images of clay tablets covered in Proto-Elamite, hoping that crowdsourcing could decode them.                                                                                     Now a collaboration involving several institutions, the project is ongoing.

 

Un “urmarit general”, necunoscut cu numele de cod “scribul”. Wanted ! Chased unknown identity person with the code name “the scribe”

November 28, 2019

Image,from https://www.ancient.eu/Sumerians/

….    ….

Aceste tablite de la Tartaria sant legate de atat de multe necunoscute, unele chestiuni de-a dreptul misterioase iar altele pur si simplu ciudate, sau ciudatenii. As putea umple instantaneu cel putin o pagina, numai enumerandu-le. Acopera realitatea depasind-o atingand S-Fiction-ul si atingand chiar domeniul rizibilului (vezi filmuletul umoristic pe Youtube).                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Va zic numai doua, una dinspre inceput si alta dinspre capat:                                                    – un personaj mai repede fantomatic a gasit tablitele, nimeni nu stie cine este acela care a pus mana pentru prima data pe ele, apoi urmand inca multe multe altele.                  – mai spre capat as situa fiinta care a scrijelit semnele; nimeni nu stie sigur cine si de unde ar fi, si mai putin cam pe cand a trait…                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Pe mine a inceput pur si simplu sa ma irite faptul ca nu avem nici cea mai vaga idee cine a fost. Ca scrie ceva pe tablite, f. bine, scrie;  acusi ma intereseaza in mod egal, dar daca ma gandesc mai bine, inca si mai mult decat ce scrie cine a fost ciudatul care le-a scris.             Asa incat m-am gandit sa o fac pe ucenicul profiler (citeste profailer), meserias care in baza urmelor si comportamentului (modul concret de actiune) stabileste un profil psihologic al unui criminal necunosct. (de fapt inafara de profilul psihologic=un tipar si mod de gandire, in plus si varsta, sex, rasa si altele).                                                                                                                                                                                                                         (Bine, daca ar fi sa ne luam dupa Domnul cercetator Marco Merlini, acesta spune ca este vorba de “Doamna de la Tartaria”, aprox. 50 de ani, o persoana cu inalt statut social si apreciere a comunitatii, un tip de preoteasa. In plus pare a sti atat de multe despre dansa incat ne-ar putea povesti ce a facut zi de zi…                                                                          Deci:…. m-am gandit sa completez provizoriu sa nu ramana spatiile goale…                             varsta ?   mai mult de 30-40 >> !?                                                                                                         sex  ?   m/f     (nu prea conteaza) optez  Masculin                                                                          rasa ?    caucazian/1.Mediteranean-Est-European !?)                                                               de bastina din… ?     1.aria Egeeana, Balcani                                                                        ocupatia de baza ?   mestesugar/comerciant/(“preot, !?)                                                      ocupatie secundara/hobby ?  religie                                                                                                  nivel de scolarizare si educatie ?     autodidact                                                                                a trait cam in timpul…x-y?      3.000 -300 BC                                                              particularitati psiho-(somatice/-../-…)    (introvertit!?)                                                                     ..eventual, nume ? Necunoscut daca f,: Hro m: Heros, …era sa zic 2.HORica =================================                                                                                       From Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis  https://books.google.ro › books                                     << consisted of mining prospectors-cum-witch-doctors from the south engaged in …   in Transylvania by Sumerian prospectors and the knowledge on metallurgy). ..                   Gelb attributed the tablets to Sumerian traders familiar with writing, or to a not …

The Position of the Tărtăria Tablets within the Southeast … – jstor
https://www.jstor.org › stable by DG Zanotti – ‎1983                                                      << postulated that Sumerian prospectors came to Transyl- vania in search of gold,>>
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistory_of_Transylvania#Neolithic                               Monteoru culture
<<The scarcity of settlements with metallurgic activity also hints at the possible existence of itinerant artisansand/or the centralization of the activity. This new development in bronze processing denotes a specialization in production with the appearance of prospectors, blacksmiths and merchants, who exported the surplus produce.>>
From Old Europe – Eye Of The Psychic
https://www.eyeofthepsychic.com › oldeurope                                                                <<Amongst various artefacts recovered were three clay tablets, which he had analysed … Sinclair Hood suggested that Sumerian prospectors had been drawn by the Transylvanian gold..>>

  —————————————————–                                                                                                Pornind chiar de la origini, unde majoritatea cercetatorilor inclina spre utilizare a tablitelor in ritualuri religioase, mai mult decat atat in mod repetat m-am lovit de popi (scuze preoti), sub o forma sau alta:

Dupa mine jumatatea de sus a tablitei rotunde ar putea contine in mod litere ale alfabetului arhaic grecesc, restul semnelor indepartandu-se treptat, in spatiu si timp de acesta. Cu cat mergem mai departe in timp, cu atat ne intalnim cu faptul ca oamenii obisnuiti nu stiau sa scrie, ci doar o parte elevata a populatiei, cu preponderenta preotii.                                                                                                                                                Din https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istoria_cre%C8%99tinismului_%C3%AEn_Rom%C3%A2nia <<  Academicianul Constantin C. Giurescu a dat ca exemplu Legiunea a V-a Macedonica, care a staționat o vreme în Palestina, înainte de a fi mutată la Troesmis și apoi la Potaissa, pe teritoriul actual al României.  ………………                                                           După istoricul creștinismului și arheologul Pr. Ion Barnea, au existat două moduri de difuzare treptată a creștinismului popular de limbă latină, mai tardive, printre Dacii liberi și printre Vlahii (Proto-Românii) din nordul Dunării :                                                         pe de-o parte păstoritul (transhumanța reprezentând, an de an, o cale de aschimburi culturale între zona carpatică, Balcani și zona ponti),                                                                     și pe de altă parte negustorii (care se deplasau cu stofe, mirodenii, mătase și produse manufacturate la nord de Dunăre, de unde se întorceau în imperiul roman de răsărit (bizantin) cu sare și aur). Lipsa unor lăcașuri de cult în anumite perioade poate fi explicată și prin persecutarea creștinilor latinofoni de către slavii păgâni și apoi de către păgânii avari, pecenegi, cumani și tătari.                                                                        După 297, pe teritoriul provinciei romane Scythia Minor, între malul drept al Dunării de jos și Tomis (cetate grecească de pe litoralul apusean al Pontului Euxin), se aflau cei mai numeroși creștini martirizați din întreg Imperiul Roman  …..                                       Unele piesele de podoabă ca: inele cu geme și inscripții, fibule, pandantive, aplici, paftale etc. ornamentate cu simboluri creștine (cruci, pești, ancore, porumbei etc.) au fost purtate de credincioși atât înainte cât și după recunoașterea oficială a cultului creștin                                                                                                                                  Despre creștinarea Proto-Românilor există două puncte de vedere, unul religios ortodox, altul laic istoric. Primul dezvoltă teoria conform căreia creștinarea a fost foarte intensă pe toată aria de răspândire a Proto-Românilor de la bun începutul etnogenezei, făcând parte integrantă din constituirea și identitatea poporului român ; al doilea afirmă că procesul de creștinare a fost mai treptat (sec. III-V la sud de Dunăre, sec. V-VIII la nord), etnogeneza integrând desigur elementele religioase, dar fiind în sine un proces cu precădere lingvistic, prin formarea limbii protoromâne și generalizarea ei printre Dacii și Tracii din Imperiul Roman.>>

Funeral Rites and Cultural Diversity in Hellenistic Caria Based …
http://www.academia.edu › Funeral_Rites_and_Cultural_Diversity_in_Hellenistic_Caria_Bas…
Din Images of Eternal Beauty in Funerary Verse Inscriptions of …
https://books.google.ro › books Andrzej Wypustek – 2012 – ‎Literary Criticism
68 Ηρως on Tombs and in Funerary Foundations Since the start of the Hellenistic epoch numerous epitaphs referred to the deceased as heroes.

 

Revendicari legate de cercetarea tablitelor de la Tartaria.Claims regarding Tartaria tablets research.

November 28, 2019

In limba romana:                                                                                                                              Afirmatiile si sustinerile care urmeaza, nu au mai fost facute de altcineva/de nimeni. Pot oferi dovezi faptice si documentare pentru fiecare sustinere, atat din lucrarile mele cat si punctual, la cerere.

  1. Tablitele de la Tartaria categoric nu apartin niciunui strat al civilizatiei sau culturii Vinca. Ultima faza a culturii Vinca, Vinca-C s-a incheiat la 4.200 B.C. !!     Doar reiterez concluziile foarte multora, deci nu-mi apartine intaietatea pentru afirmatie, dar sant mai mult decat de acord si pot sustine  :                                      Cultura Vinca nu a atins faza proto-scrierii si cu atat mai putin acea a scrierii.                    Modul in care tablitele au fost asociate Civilizatiei Vinca si unei vechimi apropiate de 5.300 B.C. nu ma priveste, dar pare sa avem de-a face posibil cu o grava eroare, unul din rarele si nedoritele “accidente arheologice”.                                                                                                                                                                                        2. Tablitele de la Tartaria evidentiaza faza prot-scrierii ( posibil chiar scriere in tablita rotunda  in special  jumatatea de sus)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                3. Cele 3 tablite posibil evidentiaza fiecare, cate una din cele 3 faze principale ale evolutiei scrisului: pictografica, ideografica si silabara/alfabetica.                                                                                                                                                                                     4. Semnele  par a apartine etapei proto-cuneiforme sumeriene dar totodata dau impresia unei colectii de semne apartinand unui mare ecart temporal, ex. 2.000 de ani.                                                                                                                                                      5. Sansele ca cineva sa aiba acces la semne dintr-un asemenea ecart temporal cresc cu cat ne apropiem de timpurile noastre.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       6. Tablitele desi prin compozitia dezlanata par a nu fi folosit unei necesitati practice uzuale si sociale in cadrul unei comunitati par sa fi  folosit                             – spre a arata evolutia scrisului in lume.                                                                            – Totusi, exista sanse reale  sa fi fost folosite in scop religios:                      ofranda,jertfa unei zeitati constand din capre si cerele/paiine.                                                                                                                                                                                              7. Semnele se apropie cel mai mult de cele sumeriene proto-cuneiforme, observatie corecta care nu-mi apartine, urmand apoi ca apropiere literele din alfabetele Anatoliene.   Aspectul neremarcat de altcineva este acela ca semnele reflecta in mod perfect, insa schitat semnele sumeriene.Semnele de pe tablita au posibil la origine semnele sumeriene insa au o forma cumva mai “rafinata” care arata o schimbare/adaptare/ evolutie in timp fiind prezente in multe scrieri ulterioare(Linear A, Canaanita,Feniciana, arhaica greaca etc.)                                                                                                                                                                                                    8. Pentru observatia ca scrisul nu este original sumerian si nici scribul nativ sumerian nu am intaietatea, dar am observat si demonstrat si eu acest fapt.                                 Semnele si scriitorul desi reflecta o filiatie si legatura directa “de sange” cu Sumerul, pot proveni mai degraba din Levant (ex.Siria)aria, Egeeana (Creta, Ciclade), eventual Anatolia.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 9.Vechimea lor poate apartine in extremis intervalului 3.000-300 B.C., ( N.Vlassa a avansat 2.700 B.C.)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     10.Am facut un studiu comparativ al semnelor de pe t. Tartaria relativ la semnele sumeriene proto-cuneiforme pe de o parte si cele Egeene pe de alta parte.             Am gasit si scos in evidenta o suma de elemente comune intre toate acestea trei ! …dovada certa a unei filiatii.                                           ====================================================                                        The folowing ideas and assertions are the results of a deep focussed research, and   were not made by anybody else before, there are all mine.   For every of them, if asking, I can furnish strong evidences and additional documentation.                                                                                                                                                                                        1. Some scientists stressed (so I could not claim authorship) that Tartaria tablets do not pertain to Vinca Culture.(Vinca culture. last phase Vinca-C ended in 4.200 B.C.    They are newer than Petresti, Baden, Cotofeni cultures.                                      Also stressed by others, and I am for it, Vinca Culture not reached the proto-writing phase, so less the writing phase. How the tablets were included by romanian archaeologist Lazarovici and italian Marco Merlini into the Vinca Culture, and how the innitial claimed/estimated age of the tablets was close to 5.300 B.C. is not my business, it seem to assist to an huge error, one of the rare cases of “archaeological accidents”                                                                                                        One must go to school and learn that no society in entire World were developed enough in order to start proto-writing stage before 3.500 B.C. !!                                                                                                                                                                                           2. Tartaria tablets could carry true writing. ( chances in entire round tablet but higher in the upper half)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       3. Every of all 3 tablets show, if wanted or unwanted, one of three main stages of world writing developement:                                                                                               – pictographic,                                                                                                                             – ideographic and                                                                                                                        syllabic/alphabetic                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 4. The signs on all 3 tablets, were used in a large time span, aprox. 1000-2.000 years.                                                                                                                                                   5. The chances to have access to the signs used in such extended time period, are rising from past toward toward present time.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                6. a)The tablets shows as an hodge-podge of signs, b)seem do not have been used for a practical purpose of  members of a comunity,                                                       c)but there are some chances to have been used in religious rituals. d)An offering sacrifice ritual of cereals/bread & goats to a deity                                           I’m claming only a)+d).                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       7. a)Many scientists stressed that the signs are closest in appearance to sumerian proto-cuneiform ones, b)folowed in order by Anatolian alphabets letters. Claiming only b)                                                                                                                           Signs are “alike” sumerian-ones but only as their sketches, cause shows kind of “refined shape”  due of an evolution in the course of time. In actual Tartaria tablets shape there are present here and there in different writings, as Linear A, Old Canaanite, Phoenician, archaic Greek….and others.                                                                                                                                                                                                               8. Other scientists stressed before me that writing was not genuine sumerian nor the scribe a native sumerian. The disposition of sign and writing technique is not entirely sumerian !                                                                                                                         Me: Even the signs origin is in Sumer, much more, even the writer ancestors origin could be in Sumer, the scribe “wrote” the tablets in  Europe, Aegean area (Crete, Cyclades ?)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             9. The age of the tablets (not the same as that of bones and rest of artifacts found near), seem upon my view could be in 3.000-300 B.C. range,                                           ( discoverer N.Vlassa advanced 2.700 B.C. !!)                                                                                                                                                                                                                             10. I compared the signs present on Tartaria  tablets with sumerian proto-cuneiform ones and also with that Aegean ones. The similiraties are much greater with sumerian than to Aegean !                                                                                               I found a lot of common elements, in my view, a certain evidence of a sumerian origin & filiation ! …                                                                                                                      (as found in the same time<?> , but not as well evidenced as me , by I.Papakitsos and G,Kenanidis )                                                                                                                                           ==================    Addit. DOC.==================                                                                                                                                                                                                               From Minoan Sumerian
    A Comparative Linguistic Study about the Sumerian Influence on the Creation of the Aegean Scripts     https://www.academia.edu/11423494/Minoan_Sumerian?fbclid=IwAR1cHsnj_dzaYsXN8Jj4sVLRfWcn_bUXlGoLn-ar6DqCHaISdo460zwKfCY
  2. From Investigating the Origins of the Minoan Civilization https://www.sumerianz.com › pdf-files › sjss2(4)33-44                                                        by EC Papakitsos                                            ; Minoan civilization; Sumerian … Kenanidis and Papakitsos, 2013a;2015; Willetts, 1977), each one created for a …
  1.  From (PDF) Cretan Hieroglyphics & Protolinear Script | Giannhs …
    https://www.academia.edu › Cretan_Hieroglyphics_and_Protolinear_Script
    The conveyed language must be a conservative form of Sumerian, as Cretan … the original and mainstream Minoan culture and religion – in contrast to Linear-A … making use of an originally Sumerian script (Papakitsos & Kenanidis 2015; …
  2.                                                                                                                                                  From Commentary and Discussion
    Reply to Rao et al. and Lee et al.
    Richard Sproat
    Center for Spoken Language Understanding https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/coli_c_00031

<<2.1 Misunderstandings about Nonlinguistic Symbols
A large part of the discussion in Rao’s response centers, as it should, on the question
of the “Type 1” (random) and “Type 2” (rigidly ordered) models, which I argued did
not accurately characterize any nonlinguistic symbol systems. At the core of this debate
is the Old European sign system of the Vinca, which is claimed to be a good instance ˇof Type 1, and the Mesopotamian deity symbols found on kudurru stones, which are
claimed to be good instances of Type 2.
To support the claims for Vinca, Rao provides a quote from Winn (1990), which ˇ
notes that the signs do not seem to have anyordering, and are “characteristically
disarranged.” But if one sees the broader context of this quote, it becomes clear that
Winn is talking here about a subset of the corpus, which is found on small vessels
and spindle whorls. He contrasts the inscriptions discussed in the quote given by
Rao with “the more arranged format of tablets and seals” (page 270), and then again
(page 276) where he notes that “[d]ifferences in complexity of sign usage is denoted
bysign ordering, which occurs on tablets and other objects, such as the plaque from
Gradesnica.” On page 263 he refers to the “discovery of tablets with script-like content ˇ
at Tartaria in 1961,” a clear indicator that the Vinca tablets would seem to involve some form of sign ordering.  >>

From The Indus Valley Script                                                                        https://rahulbasu.wordpress.com/2009/04/25/the-indus-valley-script/

<< The Indus valley script — is it a language or a bunch of pictograms? There is a school of thought which believes it’s a bunch of pictograms — typically of fish, rings, cows’ heads, and men. It seems now that this is not true.                                                              ………….The entropy of this conditional probability is, then, a measure of how much order there is in the sequence.                                                                                                                     ……………With this in hand, we compare sequences of both linguistic and non-linguistic tokens : English, both words and letters, Sumerian, Old Tamil, Sanskrit (linguistic), and DNA code, Fortran code, Kudurru inscriptions and Vinca symbols (non-linguistic). The entropy of all the linguistic systems falls within a narrow band, while the non-linguist sequences either have large (DNA, …) or small (Fortran, …) entropy.     Repeating the same for the Indus sequences, we find that they fall right in the middle of the linguistic band. Thus, in the sense of syntax, the Indus script is far more akin to natural language, than to non-linguistic systems like DNA, Fortran, Kudurru and Vinca. >>

O ipoteza de lucru (albaneza); sau “era o vreme cand pentru turmele de oi si ciobani nu erau granite”…

November 23, 2019

A se vedea: http://www.diacronia.ro › indexing › details › pdf Fenomene dialectale purtate de păstorii ... – Diacronia                                                                                                                            << În lucrarea de faţă, ne propunem să evidenţiem rolul jucat de transhumanţă, … Aceasta a făcut posibil ca populaţiile balcanice (de exemplu, albanezii) să-i….>>

Din https://www.wikiwand.com/ro/Istoria_limbii_rom%C3%A2ne

=========================================================

Studiind de mult timp principalele sisteme de scriere (de cca. 12 ani) am realizat ca semnele de pe tablite i-mi sant, mi-au devenit de fapt, foarte familiare. In sensul ca toate semnele de pe toate cele trei tablite se regasesc atat in aria sumeriana cat si in cea Egeeana. Am reusit diferite interpretari in acest sens, apropiindu-ma progresiv de o presupusa si dorita interpretare totala si unitara.                                                                     Din pacate, (desi este totodata stimulator), tablitele au fost un fel de fata morgana, cu imaginea neclara, dar in schimb devenind din ce in ce mai clara.                                                         Desi am constientizat faptul ca pe tablita rotunda am putea avea litere, mult timp am ramas limitat la ideea ca doar jumatatea de sus a tablitei rotunde contine scris adevaratLa o asemenea cantonare si limitare a contribuit faptul ca gandeam ca doar jumatatea de sus contine scris adevarat fiind acoperita (!?).                                                   Nici nu santem siguri ca “scriitorul” a avut in mod cert o asemenea intentie. Interesant este faptul ca nu demult am trecut foarte aproape de aceasta interpretare finala. In alfabetele arhaice grecesti folosite inainte de standardizare, semnul D s-a folosit pentru litera D intr-o parte si pentru litera R in alta parte.

Chiar si in aceasta faza finala a cercetarii mele, sant suficient de modest si sa nu am pretentia de a oferi o interpretare ori citire unica, ultimativa si adevarata. Daca ati observat, in decursul timpului am facut multe sondari, testari, incercari de citire.    ==============================================                                                                  Din https://www.wikiwand.com/en/History_of_the_Greek_alphabet

Image result for "archaic greek alphabets"                                                                     ***************************                                                                                                      Daca semnele din jumatatea superioara a tablitei rotunde asa cum par sant in realitate litere (arhaice grecesti):                                                                                                                     H, D     (Heta/Eta-Rho)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Din  Moonlight in Romania: The Tărtăria Tablets http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              si semnele D D o c/u, =R R s/u,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            din http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Atunci putem avea: din albaneza:    herë    pronuntie, heră                                                                                 HeRë   RRok, care este:                                                                                                                            Din https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=hera                                                     herë, hera: “time”/”timp” ;                                                                                                                      Rrok :  Din https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=rrok                                                   rrok: “snatch, grasp, gripe, grip, catch” =”a smulge, prinde, intelege“, unde grasp, “prinde” are atat in engleza cat si in romana sensul fizic de a prinde,cuprinde, cat si a intelege, deci “intelege timpul“,                                                                                                  Apoi, din https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=hera%20%20rrok  “time to catch up” herë  rrok : “to catch up the time” :” a prinde timpul”                                                                  ————————————————-                                                                                                    Iar daca semnul +++++ este Si (greaca Xi ?).                                                                               Din https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=si : Si: “as, like,for, such as”‘ :”pentru”  së:”the”, articolul hotarat  https://translate.google.com/#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=s%C3%AB                                                                                                                                                                       iar “here si rrok”:”as/for grasp the time“=”pentru a intelege timpul“, caz in care este vorba de un calendar.                                                                                                                                          Daca semnul +++++ semnifica cifra 50, atunci am putea avea:” a prins timp 50″ (ani), cam cat s-a constatat varsta decedatei a carei oase au fost gasite langa tablite !

Din https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#sq/en/hera%20se%20rrok                                                     hera se rrok hera se rrok:”more than ever”:”mai mult (timp) ca niciodata” cam tot pe acolo, exprimand oricum o varsta inaintata in trecut/acele timpuri.                                      —————————————————–                                                                                                  In sfertul din stanga-jos,                                                                                                                Din    http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html                 Image result for moonlight tartaria     avem semnele:                                       Q,  GG si jos Z. In linear A/B un semn asemanator aceluia “arc cu sageata” era folosit pentru Ko/Ku                                                                                                                                     Din https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=ku Ku:”where, wherein, whither, wherever, whereabouts”/”unde“,                                                 apoi GG:”geg/GHEG“?                                                                           https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=zi Zi:”mourning”/”jelire”                                                                                                                    Din https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=ze    Ze:”Vox”/”voce”                                                                                                                                   Din https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=ku%20geg%20zi                                       “Ku geg zi“::”that black geg”, de fapt zi nu este nici-un fel de negru, ci jelire                          Ku Gheg Zi :”unde jeleste/este jelit Gheg-ul”?                                                                                  ————————————————-                                                                                                           In sfertul din dreapta jos,                                                                                                             Din http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html                                                                                                  Avem in semnul din stanga, cladite de sus in jos semnele: E, G, c/K  https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=e           E:”of/”din,al”                                                                                                                                      GK: GeK:”gegë  geg”?

Din Gheg Albanian – Wikipedia  https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Gheg_Albaniann   <<Gheg Albanian (also spelled Geg Albanian; Gheg Albanian: gegnisht, Standard Albanian: gegë or gegërisht) is one of the two major varieties of Albanian. The other is Tosk on which Standard Albanian is based.>>                                                                            Din  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gheg_Albanian

  Image result for albanian "e gegë"

E gek:” de-al lui Gheg. Gugu”                                                                                                                      Din   https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#sq/en/e%20geg%C3%AB            e  gegë :”of gege”

Din Fustanella – Eupedia Forum https://www.eupedia.com › forum › threads › 25617-Fustanella › page3                                                                                                                       << Albanians were called Arvanite by Greeks in the middle ages. …. 11 geg also gugu in moesia also gygy in lydia comes from achaic gag or aga >>

————————————————————                                                                                             Semnul din dreapta are cladite de sus in jos semnele K. L, D           https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=ku Ku:”where”/”unde”                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Din https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=le  lë :”leave”, “pleaca, paraseste”                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Din https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=dhe                                                    dhe:”and”/”si”                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Ku le dhe :’si unde pleaca“?                                                                                https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=ku%20le%20dhe                                          Ku le dhe “”and where let” :”si unde lasi

e gek ku le dhe:” of geg? where let and” :”and where let of geg/gegs” =”si unde lasi de-ai geg-ilor”?                                                                                                                                                  Din https://translate.google.com/? https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=dhi                                                 Dhi:”goat”/”capra

Din  https://translate.google.com/? https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#view=home&op=translate&sl=sq&tl=en&text=e%20gek%20ku%20le%20dhi             e gek ku le dhi: “of a goat that let go” ? =”unul de-al caprelor/ geg/get/goth care ne lasa/se duce” ??                                                                                                                                     ——————————————————                                                                                                    Acuma se pune problema cine ar fi putut scrie tablitele.  Apar doua ipoteze mari si late: A. Vlassa sau cineva din apropiere                                                                                                    B. Un nativ albanez                                        ===================================================                                                       Pentru prima sansele sant foarte mici, cu toate caVlassa, pare intradevar a fi fost Vlah (Vlassa este o forma a lui Vlah) deoarece:                                                                                         – nu il vad atat de pregatit sa stie sa foloseasca semne asemanatoare cu cele sumeriene si chiar nici altele                                                                                                                                       – tablitele arata a fi efectiv vechi, adica au stat in pamant ani si ani de zile                             – banuiesc ca trebuia sa fi sustinut ca sant facute de daci sau vlahi si nu de sumerieni Pentru a doua ipoteza, ori                                                                                                                        – este vorba de un gen de calendar rural, dar atunci restul textului (cel putin in forma gasita de mine) nu este in concordanta                                                                                            – ori este vorba de o ceremonie funerara, caz in care oasele gasite in imediata proximitate pe de o parte vin sa sustina aceasta ipoteza, iar pe de alta intra in contradictie. Intrucat varsta lor este determinata (C14) la cca. 5.000 B.C., cand nu era nici scriere, nici albanezi, eventual doar o forma de pelasgi.                                 ===============================                                                                                                      La o incercare de apropiere folosind limba greaca, sau alte ramuri I.Europene, se pare ca pot extrage un continut relativ inchegat , dar se schimba partial topica, ramanand se pare un continut religios si sacru, ofranda cu laitmotivul “capra”. De pilda:                             Hera(s); Ed,Ede DiDOU: “ HERA,Doamn(ei) ; Ied/Mananca/sa dai                                           ? H(i)era:” obiecte sacre/parafernalia ?                                                                                               Pentru jumatatea inferioara in stanga, Din literele Q GG Z :                                                          KuG-Ga. KuGa, Kaga ; Za,Ze : “bunic, Stramos”,”ofranda,Sacru“? ; Zeu

Din Indo European Etymology – Scribd https://www.scribd.com › document › Indo-European-Etymology                                                                                                                       << Proto IndoEuropean roots and their derivatives in several … alalkein; elkas, alkas alkaqw; alkar raksati ‘nemus sacrum‘ ‘protecti’, …..kaga ‘dens‘ …>>

Din Dacian Language – Romanian History and Culture https://www.romanianhistoryandculture.com › dacianlanguage                                    << KAGA: un important cuvânt dacic -37 kb …… The word καγα occurs twice, in ISM II 36 and in ISM II 138, with the meaning sacrum.>>

Din The Origin of Cuprum, Bakar and Var  science.org.ge › old › moambe › Hlebec by B Hlebec                                                                                                                                                      <<. ….. PIE *h2euh2os > Hittite huhhas, Lith. kuga ‘grandfather‘,>>

Din Proto-Indo-European Kinship – jstor   https://www.jstor.org › stable   by P Friedrich – ‎1966 – ‎<<kinship from the reconstructed stages of Proto-IndoEuropean (PIE) and. Common Slavic ….. Kurylowicz (1935: 74) has argued that the root began with a Pre-Proto-Indo– …… parent’s father (Hittite huhhas), to the mother’s father (Lycian xuga).>>

Pentru jumatatea inf. dreapta din grupurile de litere E,U,G/E,G,u/s in semnul din stanga si A/E G S in semnul din dreapta:                                                                                                     EGuEGeaS, Aegis. aigis, aigos : “Eu (sant)  Aigai(on),Egeean, (scut, caprari ?

Din A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Spanish …  https://books.google.ro › books                                                                                                                                                    <<efusivo, va a. effusive; efuso, sa a. effused. égida z egida f. aegis. [L. aegis, aegidis: id. <Gk. aigis: goatskin, a shield of skin <aix, aigos: goat. See *aig– in App.>> . ======================================= 

Am putea avea: HP  R o o/c  =                                                                         EPi RRoo   , unde RR=Rho, “R rotacizat”,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Din Song of Genesis 1 | Page 2 | Religious Forums https://www.religiousforums.com › … › << Flowings down a mountain are called streams or rivers in English. … curiosity, what background do you have in linguistics or Biblical studies? … of air ‘, it’s cognate in Gk is ῥόῳ (Rhoo) meaning ‘stream, flow of water, current’ .>>                                             Atentie, avem un gen de liniuta in interiorul primului semn D, o fi un “i“?

EPIRROO, EPIROS, (EPEIROS/ EPIROT) : “pe/peste- Rau” , sau RIVERan/vecin ?                                                                                                                                                                                          Din https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Epirus#LatinFrom Latin Ēpīrus, from Ancient Greek Ἤπειρος (Ḗpeirosmainland)

Din https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pellg#Albanian                                                                          From Old Albanian pellëg, borrowed from Ancient Greek πέλαγος (pélagossea)

Din  Basil Chulev Pelasgi/Balasgi, Belasgians (Pelasgians/Pelasgi/Pelasti/Pelišti) – the Archaic Mythical Pelasgo/Stork-people from Macedonia https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?zx=5altn8zeq797#inbox/FMfcgxwGBmqTMLvxLDscWTcJhsrTfQKn?projector=1&messagePartId=0.1                                                                                                                <<  Homer also speaks of Epirus as a chief abode
of the Pelasgoi; for Achilles addresses Ze(us) as “Dodonai Pelasgike” (i.e. „Dodonan Pelasgoi‟).11                                                                                                           ………….             They were in Ipeiros (Epirus) too, a land abounding with water brooks, with lovely mountains, and lovelier valleys, and at length settled, and erected themselves lasting habitations in the sacred neighborhood of Dodona, where the first oracle known to history flourished under the protection of the Pelasgian Zeus.      …………..                                   Macedonia, with the important difference that the Middle Bronze period, which in Central Macedonia was characterized by incised ware with Cycladic affinities, was characterized in Chalcidice by Minyan, southern in character, but adapted to local Early Bronze forms as well.

Apropos de stork-people, poporul cocostarc                                                                                   ARDeal:                                                                                                                                                     lat. ARDEA,  Ancient Greek ἐρῳδιός (erōidiós, :”heron”=starc si ARDEUS:                                                                                                                                                                                                      Din A New Universal Etymological and Pronouncing Dictionary of … https://books.google.ro › books                                                                                         (ardeusLat.) Hot; burning; fiery; fierce; vehement; having the appearance or quality of fire; passionate; affectionate

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/arduus    loftyhighsteeptallelevated                               “inalt,impadurit”

        ================================================================                     Semnele de pe celelalte tablite sustin si au legatura cu contextul cultic, insa apartin unor perioade si civilizatii extrem de indepartate.Ma refer la cele Egeeana si chiar mai departe la cea mama cea sumeriana.                                     *******************************************

Va intreb acuma, cum este posibil ca atatia savanti de renume, din toate domeniile de la proto-scriere, ma refer la scrierea proto-cuneiforma, pana la lingvisti si arheologi s-au lasat pacaliti cu asa-zise semne sumeriene ? Bqa mai mult, majoritatea nici nu au putut macar demonstra de o maniera convingatoare ca este vorba de scriere, ramanand agatati in aer in spatiul magic al proto-scrierii. De ce? pentru ca s-au lasat pacaliti de presupusa gasire a tablitelor intr-unul din straturile Vinca A/C si de varsta unor oase la cca. 5.300 B.C. Felicitari D-le Marco Merlini si dragi cercetatori si arheologi romani !

Unexpected outcome (in romanian:”unde dai, si unde crapa!”)

November 19, 2019

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT                                                                                                                               I do not claim for a true nor an accurate reading, I am making only testings, showing samples for possible interpretations of the signs on the round Tartaria tablet. In romanian, “sample” is: “proba, exemplu, sondare”

Today I spent some hours searching for words in old languages begining with geminate D, “DD” ( in order  to solve and escape the weird, headaching, impossible sequence on the round tablet “D D o o/c” ).                                                                                                                      note:                                                                                                                                                         – The words with initial geminate consonants are extremely rare in I.E. languages   – As a result, we have a word with a geminate inside, word begining with the equivalent of the sign +++++ (Se,Su,Xi,Z. Zu..)                                                                                                                  – We do not know for sure if “D signs” are for d or for r, cause in archaic greek alphabets the sign was used as d in one place and as r in another !                                                                 – Carian, lycian and other Anatolian writings,  had greek-derived alphabets and signs/letters had different phonetic values as greek-ones ! From http://www.palaeolexicon.com/Carian                        Image result for lycian alphabet

 Picture, from    http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html                                                                                                                                       ———————————————

So I preffered to search in old languages.                                                                                        So for low chances hipothesys of a word begining with geminate, and supposing to be written with archaic greek letters. I found lycian Ddeu and Ddewe.                                         * The lycian language pertain to Anatolian branch of I.European family. wich  left earlier the  I.E. trunk/family. Lycians, “Lukka” (named by themselves  Trm̃mis, “trmily”) are supposed ancestors of Latins, see Aeneas story, Romanians included Lycaones/wolf people. The Lycian language has ancient characteristics, also an weird sounding and awkard language. Adding the scarcity of written material, the result is that there are only a few wich had the expertise.But even these few have no same opinions regarding the particular aspects, as in the folowing lines is true *

From A Linguistic Happening in Memory of Ben Schwartz: Studies in … Yl Arbeitman, Yoël L. Arbeitman · 1988 · Language Arts & Disciplines Studies in Anatolian, Italic, and Other Indo- European Languages Yl Arbeitman, Yoël L. Arbeitman.                                             <<[4] mere … [9] ddewe (ou ddeu) : d’ après le contexte et l’ adjectif ddewezi >>

From WordGumbo Indo-European Comparative Indo-European – bulgari-istoria Ivanov V. Common Indo-European, Proto- Slavic and Anatolian Language Systems. Moscow.       << 3. ….. ddewe- (a city) dewi- B >>

From P. Serafimov – Etymological Analysis Of Thracian Toponyms And Hydronyms.pdf  “In my opinion Tabaya corresponds to Thracian DABA, DEVA, DAVA – gathering, camp, fortress, and of course to Modern Slavic tabor – camp (Sl, Blg, Cz). In Asia Minor Lycians used the word ddewe for a settlement, village and krte – city, enwalled place [7]”

My note:                                                                                                                                                   – for the moment I agree with settlement, village. This word could be a gramatical form of thracian: “Daua, Deba, Dewa?,Deva, Diza..”                                                                                    – But remember there is no consensus on meaning (eg. “city”) !

From (PDF) The Lycian ḫi-conjugation revisited. Arbeitstagung der … https://www.academia.edu › The_Lycian_ḫi-conjugation_revisited._Arbeitsta…                    Sep 23, 2015 – The inherited ḫi-conjugation in Lycian 2.1 The Lycian ḫi-verbs: the 3sg presents …. (2004 s.v.), denominative *-ye/o-verb to ddewe– ‘give, dedicate’ (?). ….. Neumann 2007) = Lyc. xi- Iterative Pret3Sg xi[st]te 55,6 ‘was offering …

———————————————————–                                                                                        Also as word-begining with geminate, I found:                                                                                 From https://books.google.ro › books
The Neapolitan Canzone in the Early Nineteenth Century as …
Pasquale Scialò, Francesca Seller, Anthony R. DelDonna · 2015 · Music
<< Furthermore, the word “dio” is pronounced [ ddìo]; “dio” also doubles in Neapolitan. … something significant while avoiding mention of the name of God), “Ddio” (God  >>  Signs DD o o/D D o u > reading> DDio, DDeu  ?                                                                               Note In a cultural movement named “Scoala ardeleana” in Romania (in order to reconstitute the original latin writing !?!),was used in writing DDeu for God/Dumnezeu                                                                                                                                                          From Transilvania – Feder.. – UAIC                                                                                                << pentru a reapuca opulu impacatiunii cu regatulu Ungariei , si a- lu duce cu voi’a lui Ddiou la o deslegarea folositoria si dorita de ambe partile >>                                              ——————————————————                                                                                                    On the greek side, I found also: From     The Archaic Cretan Greek Alphabet http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Eteocretan/archaic_alpha.html

<< zai (zeta): the sound denoted by this symbol seems to have varied in different Greek dialects. Some instances of classical ζ derive from earlier /sd/, e.g. ἵζω (hizo) “I seat” ← *si-sd-ō (cf. Latin: sīdō). The majority of cases, however, derive from a earlier */dj/, */gj/ suggesting that sound denoted by ‘z’ in transcriptions of Mycenaean Linear B was /dj/ or an affricate such as [ʤ] or [ʣ]. It would seem, however, that in the archaic and classical periods, by a process of assimilation or metathesis, the sound varied in the dialects between [dd], [zd] and [zz] with the latter becoming the norm by the Hellenistic period and giving way eventually to the modern Greek [z]. In Cretan Greek [dd] was the norm and the spelling δδ is also found. But there appears to have been a tendency in Crete to devoice this combination as ττ is also found for standard Greek ζ; indeed, we also occassionally find actual /tt/ spelled ζ. >>

My note:                                                                                                                                                   even if dd was found in the middle of words, why not :                                                                 From earlier PIE Dju > cretan Zu/Zou ( attested “Zou to lako” (for Zeus)!) or even unattested: DDou !?

From The Textualization of the Greek Alphabet Roger D. Woodard · 2014 · Foreign Language Study … λύγος (lugos), a term denoting ‘withe’, descended from a Proto-Indo-European root meaning ‘to … it is to the ‘Pelasgian Zeus of Dodona’ (Ζεῦ Δωδωναῖε Πελασγικέ [Zdeu

From On Germanic Linguistics: Issues and Methods https://books.google.ro › books

Irmengard Rauch, ‎Gerald F. Carr, ‎Robert L. Kyes – 1992 – ‎Language Arts & Disciplines

… since forms with *dd < dj predominated, the modern Dutch form is hard ‘hard’, with a … But Van Wijk’s comparison of Balto-Slavic and Common IndoEuropean …

From Early dialectal diversity in South Slavic I | Human Voice …
https://www.scribd.com › document › Early-dialectal-diversity-in-South-Sl…
From How to pronounce the word ‘ddot’ – Quora
https://www.quora.com › How-do-you-pronounce-the-word-ddot
Jun 24, 2013 – I have never heard of this word, could you please elaborate on it’s meaning … Welsh uses an initialdd“, pronounced “th” as in “the”

——————————————————————————-                                                                    But after some time, I was turning by chance to the word Ardeal. Nobody knw when this toponim apeared and the true etymology. ( I found an entire polemic around the etymology on wikipedia)

Erdel — Brill
, Erdīl or Erdelistān , from the Hungarian Erdély ( erdö elve = beyond the forest); Ardeal in Rumanian; Siebenbürgen in German; the Latin name Terra Ultrasilvas and later Transsilvania being a translation of the Hungarian—the province of Transylvania which now constitutes the western portion …
referenceworks.brillonline.com

From Geto-Daci to Vlachs – Romanian History and Culture The Romanian word “Ardeal” was corrupted into “Erdel” and “Erdol” meaning “land of forested heights”. From the … “Ard” as an Indo -European root-word means “hill, forested ..

I had in mind the IE root ERD:”earth

Origins of European Peoples: Part One: Ancient History Mario Mosetto · 2018 · History Hen = tyúk = duck Then = atán = dann Beech = bükkfa = Buchse in German Salmon … Lohn (German) = salary Forest, forestry = erdő, erdel = Erde, earth Origin = eredet(Latin

https://books.google.ro › books
Sievers’ Law and the History of Semivowel Syllabicity in …
P. J. Barber, Peter Jeffrey Barber · 2013 · History
other Indo-European languages. … ὀρθός ‘ straight, upright’; Lat. arduus ‘high, steep‘; OIr. ard ‘high’; ON. o ̨rðugr ‘upright’.72 However

( latin ARDEA :”Heron”) rom. batlan, cocostarc

In my opinion, there is ARD+ article EL (or ARDA+article AL) >> ARDEL, ARDAL, or ARDEA+ article L >>ARDEAL                                 =========================================

But begining from the root ERD, I realised that I have on the round tablet signs HP = “ER”

On the right, the signs D D o c.

But you seem inside the 1-st D there is an sign. Had an trembling hand, tremor the scribe when scraped this first D ? I think not, because the sign not begin at the finish of tracing the sign, when left tha sign tracing (getting the stylus upward).                                           This would be an “L”

So. out of H P D L >we obtain> ERDeL (or ERDELI, ERDELYI) What about the remaining ” Note                                                                                                                                                     Hope there was no such an idiot on earth,  in order to sustain a very early presence of hungarians in Transylvania/Ardeal and make forgeries !                                                                        But what about the remaining D o o”, or  “D o c” signs ?

Could be ERDELYI DOG: ” Ardeal carcass”………Brrr. scared to death !

One is making the connexion with the bones found close by. Another suposition would be “ERDELyi DOC” as for Erdelyi doctor <translated from latin> “Ardeal teacher”

Zsófia Torma – Wikipedia Zsófia Torma (September 26, 1832 – November 14, 1899) was a Hungarian … She was the first female to become an honorary doctor in Kolozsvári m. kir. Ferencz József Tudomány

Could be kind of gift from abroad, from an german? scientist or his brother who was also an archaeolog ? Or an gift handy-made by Torma  for herself waitng in vain the receiving of diploma? In fact the title become effective after she died !

This is the 2-nd time I am coliding with “doc”,                                                                                  cause the 1-st time was when I put D D o c” on Google the outcome was :                          latin abbreviation for “decretorum doctor”=”teacher/profesor of theological doctrine/canonical law”                                                                                                                       ( doceo: lat. “to teach”                                                                                                                           From doceo – Ancient Greek – English Dictionary (LSJ) https://lsj.gr › wiki › doceo             << dŏcĕo: cŭi, ctum, 2, v. a. root da; Zend. dā, to know; strengthened, dak-; Gr. διδάσκω; Lat. disco,  to teach, instruct, inform, show, tell, etc.   >>                                                                                                                                                                                                                            From Doctor (title) – Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Doctor_(title)                                Doctor is an academic title that originates from the Latin word of the same spelling and meaning. The word is originally an agentive noun of the Latin verb docēre [dɔˈkeːrɛ] ‘to teach’.                                                                                                                                       Note: ….. and also DDOC, abbreviation for “DE DOCTRINA CHRISTIANA).                                                                                                                                                                                                        *This “doctor” title was given by Vatican authority around 1.500AD, to some hungarian priests, after finishing studies in superior catholic university, ?one from Romania/Cenad ?)                                                                                                                                                                  Not to forget that HP on the left could be for Hera (greek and latin for mistress)

So MISS TARTARIA of Mr. Marco Merlini, could not be his world-wide trumpeted neolithic sage/priestess, but who knows for sure who in fact was !?                                         ————————————————                                                                                                       If there is DDoc :decretorum doctor” then I must remember you that I advanced hipothesis that tablets had fallen down from upper strata.The tablets were found there from a much new strata or was brought by somebody else, later assuring us that were found on the site.The entire archaeological site “Tartaria Gura Luncii” shape drastically changed, cause  was digged entirely  in different periods of time, from medieval time to modern time. It is crossed by an early medieval trench, pertaining to an fortification.                                                                                                                                   From TĂRTĂRIA-GURA LUNCII. FORTIFICAȚIA MEDIEVALĂ TIMPURIE CARE TAIE TELLUL PREISTORIC Zeno-Karl Pinter Sabin Adrian Luca                                                            << În Evul Mediu, cândva în preajma marii invazii tătaro-mongole (sec. XIII), localnicii realizează o fortificație colosală care, din nefericire, afectează profund situl.                       Fig. 3. Zona sitului de la Tărtăria-Gura Luncii. Imagine cu efectele „ruperii” tell-ului prin construirea fortificației din Evul Mediu (foto Florentina Marțiș).                                         Alte mari distrugeri asupra tellului se datorează construirii drumului modern (șoselei – sec. XX), dar și a căii ferate simple (sec. XIX) și mai apoi duble (sec. XX).Și mai putem să adăugăm și distrugerile cauzate de construirea celor două poduri de cale ferată care străjuiesc dreaptastânga tellul (doar pentru podul dinspre nordest s-au sacrificat aproximativ 2.000 m2!). Este bine să precizăm și faptul că intervențiile la care ne-am referit au condus la distrugeri totale!                                                                                    Fig. 15. Tărtăria-Gura Luncii. Tellul neolitic (galben) și fortificația medievală (albastru).  În momentul de faţă, raportat la actualul stadiu al cercetării, suntem nevoiţi să avem în vedere două ipoteze de lucru privitoare la originea şi funcţionalitatea puternicei fortificaţii (Fig. 15 – conturarea tellului și fortificației) de la Tărtăria-Gura Luncii):

  1. O fortificaţie a tătarilor, un loc de adunare a cetelor tătărăşti înainte de atacul asupra centrului de putere de la Alba-Iulia. În acest caz trebuie însă pusă şi întrebarea, de cine ar fi avut motiv să se teamă tătarii?
    1. O fortificaţie a populaţiei din zonă, un punct de apărare şi în acelaşi timp de control al Văii Mureşului, în punctul cel mai bine plasat strategic, punct de control folosit încă în perioada hallstatiană şi apoi în secolele VIII-IX, aşa cum demonstrează descoperirile mai vechi, dar extrem de relevante, de la Blandiana şi Tărtăria.Pentru această ipoteză avem şi susţinerea singurului izvor scris: Carmen Miserabile în care clericul Roger (Rogerius) relatează în capitolul XL (40) despre existenţa unei populaţii numeroase înTransilvania, populaţie ce a ridicat numeroase fortificaţii după prima trecere a tătarilor spre vest, fortificaţii distruse însă, în cea mai mare parte de tătari, la întoarcerea lor spre Asia.                                                                                   ………………….Încă cele mai vechi cercetări legate de acest material arheologic, consideră că scăriţa de călărie apare în Europa de est după secolul al VI-lea, fiind adusă din Orientul Îndepărtat de către populaţiile de stepă În zona Bazinului Carpatic, ele sunt puse în legătură cu stăpânirea avară. >>              Din https://www.academia.edu/35891668/O_locuire_medieval_timpurie_pe_Valea_Mure%C8%99ului_Mijlociu._T%C4%83rt%C4%83ria-Situl_9                       <<Alături de materialul de tip ceramic întâlnim şi o descoperire numismatică, maiconcret o monedă din cupru (Pl. III/7), identificată în stratul de cultură, în apropiere decomplexul 52, la adâncimea de 0,45 m faţă de nivelul actual de călcare. Piesa are ogreutate de 1,2 g şi un diametru de 2,3 mm, fiind emisă în perioada regelui maghiar Bèla al III-lea (1172-1196)>>
      *******************************************************************                              On the folowing picture, it is not clear if a tooth of the comb-sign go down to the D bar  or not ??. From  TARTARIA TABLETS – Prehistory knowledge

  My final opinion it is for NOT, the same as of Mr. Marco Merlini.

 But one must think that :                                                                               – there are slight chances when sombody is tracing separately the comb-like sign, and after this the “letter row” to result such a continuity/superposing of lines !    Try it !            – when tracing a letter with a ball-pen, we can do it in one step, without lifting the hand, but when scraping, tracing an “b”, is not possible !                                                                        – if it is the case of a religious-related word, we could expect kind of hiding, disguising of signs/letters, in order to not  be read by the  first passer-by at first sight.                                  – we do not know how thought the writer the succesion of steps or what in reality decided, done for writing those signs                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             From  https://www.researchgate.net/figure/First-tablet-from-Tartaria-Picture-483-478-pixels_fig2_331257472          Image result for tartaria tablets

So, taking as real such a posibility, signs : D b o c ??,                                                                   Note:                                                                                                                                                                 Big problem:                                                                                                                                    LUNATE SIGMA. The form of the Greek letter sigma used in Medieval Greek and occasionally in Greek Orthodox Church transcriptions: ϲ.    …. but not as bad I was afraid:

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigma#Lunate_sigma                                                           <<  In handwritten Greek during the Hellenistic period (4th and 3rd centuries BC), the epigraphic form of Σ was simplified into a C-like shape.>>                                                                                                                                                                                                                    reading: Di b o s >DIVOS                                                                                                                      ! note the  sign inside 1-st D, wanted to make an “I” and the hand trembled ?

From PIE in the Sky: The Proto-Indo-European Root of Zeus http://gorffennol.swansea.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Carys-Mills-PIE-in-the-Sky-the-proto-indo-european-root-of-Zeus.pdf

<<After all, PIE *w became the Latin consonantal u and the Greek ϝ. The ū present in the Latin diūs and Iū is thus explained by PIE *ēw > PItal. *ow > OL. ou > L. ū.

PIE Skt. Gr. Lat.
Nom. dyḗw-s dyaus Ζεύς diūs
Voc. dyew (dyaus) Ζεῦ Iū
Acc. dyḗ-m dyām Ζῆν diem
Gen. diw-ós divas Δι(ϝ)ός Iouis
Dat. diw-éy divē Δι(ϝ)εί-φιλος Iouī
Loc. dyéw-i diví/dyávi Δι(ϝ)ί Ioue
Abl. diw-ós divā Ioue

LATIN Dīvus, adj. ‘divine’
Nom. dīvus dīvī
Voc. dīve dīvī
Acc. dīvum dīvōs
Gen. dīvī dīvōrum
Dat. dīvō dīvīs
Abl. dīvō dīvīs  >>

From ETRUSCANS, VENETI and SLOVENIANS: A Genetic …                                            http://www.korenine.si › zborniki › zbornik05 › belchevsky_rea

<< The forms divo > diva > divi > dii are very similar and also provide an alternate meaning to the Latin words ‘dii > die > deus’. What is most interesting and significant is that ancient coins, which have been found in the Balkans with a form of the word “Divos” inscribed in them [8]:

qibos [9] =  Dibos  = divos”

qibos is similarly close to the Greek word qeios or qeos,  which today is widely used in a significant part of society.

It is important to note here that in other European languages, words associated with the word Theos > Deos > God have only shallow etymological and functional root relationships. Curtius [1] has hinted to the possibility that some present forms of the word Theos could have evolved from the root/concept relating to divos, but he did not provide complete and convincing arguments mainly because he did not consider the Slavic languages as platforms for his interpretation. He quotes the Italian etymologist Ascoli [10] who identified ‘Theos’ with the Sanskrit root div and divja-s ‘heavenly’ and from div-eo-s arrived at dveos and theos:

divos > dibos > qibos > qeios > qeos >>

TARTARIA: HERO DIVOS : ” LORD GOD/DIVINE/CELESTial ” ?                                     romanian:

 “DOMNUL – ZEU D U M N E Z E U

Even using so-called hungarian rovasiras,

Out of the signs: wich are: Z-Ni, ZeN,  Dz-eNi,                                                                                                                                                                                                     From https://www.omniglot.com/writing/hungarian_runes.htm

Székely-Hungarian Rovás

The variants of the Ζεύς paradigm from the different Greek dialects are shown in the
table below:2
Nom. Ζεύς / Δεύς / Ζήν / Ζάς / Ζάν / Δίς
Voc. Ζεῦ
Acc. Ζῆν / Ζῆνα / Δῆν / Δῆνα / Ττῆνα / Τῆνα / Δι(ϝ)α / Δια / Ζᾶνα / Ζέα / Ζεῦν
Gen. Δι(ϝ)ός / Διός / Ζηνός / Ττηνός / Ζανός / Ζαντός / Ζεός

http://www.korenine.si/zborniki/zbornik05/belchevsky_rea.htm                                             It is important at this point to also point out the conceptual relationship of woman to procreation, offspring, existence and life propagation, as most profoundly expressed in Macedonian/Slavic Languages: ???? (zhena), ???? (zhene), ???? (zheni), ?????? (zheneti) > gene > genesis > genetics

Montes Serrorum (Carpathians, Retezat Mtns)

November 13, 2019

Carpathian Mountains – Unionpedia, the concept map

https://en.unionpedia.org › Carpathian_Mountains

 

Montes Serrorum nu inseamna Muntii Serilor !                                                                             Pe de o parte denumirea vine din latina:                             http://www.dicolatin.com/FR/LAK/0/SERRI/index.htm

nom propre
SERRIUM, II, n
1 siècle après J.C.PLINIUS (Pline)
Serrium n. : montagne et promontoire de Thrace
nominatif pluriel SERRI
vocatif pluriel SERRI
accusatif pluriel SERROS
génitif pluriel SERRORUM

Iar pe de alta parte vine din latina vulgara care face parte din si cuprinde familia limbilor romanice (romance family) din care face parte romana si spaniola.                        De fapt, SERROU inseamna “retezat” : https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228677946_WordNet_as_a_base_lexicon_model_for_the_computation_of_verbal_predicates

Ele serrou a ´arvore com a serra.
‘he sawed the tree with the saw’
Si probabil in latina SERRI=”retezati” >>gen.pl. SERRORUM:”(ai) RETEZATILOR”
Deci momtes Serrorum:”muntii RETEZATILOR”

Montes Serrorum – Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Montes_Serrorum

 

(PDF) List of Greek and Latin roots in English List of Greek …

 

https://www.academia.edu › List_of_Greek_and_Latin_roots_in_English_…