Archive for November, 2018

Hera, Horos, Orion, calendar in Old Europe civilisation and in the tablets ?.

November 26, 2018

Hera, Horos and Orion related to Old Europe civilisation and the tablets ?

Careful/ Attention !                                                                                                                                   These posts  not contain a satisfactorily decipherment or reading of any tru writing and  written content of Tartaria tablets. Especially since we are dealing with proto-cuneiform signs, and therefore consequently with proto-writing.  Given that the signs do not belong to a single writing system but to several, the page has a purely didactic character. It has the role of trying and testing different writings, in the idea that the tablets would have used one of them. The signs on the tablets belong to several writing systems over a long period of time and which have been used in different geographical areas. In none of the trials did the signs fall into a single type of writing, there always remained signs that came from other writings (or as coming from the unknown). Most of the signs come from the Sumerian proto-cuneiform -shaped ones. The signs in the upper half of the round tablet seem to come from archaic Greek writing. This “collection” of signs seems to be the fruit of one’s rich imagination. As A. Falkenstein and A. A. Vaiman found, (this is also my firm opinion) the author was not a scribe, he had only scarce knowledge/vague notions about writing in general, and it is not known what he intended  or he was after. There are many elements of inconsistency as well as others that take the tablets out of the usual patterns and norms of  logics, writing and honest intentions.



“The image above shows the front and back of a carved fragment of mammoth ivory measuring 38 mm x 14 mm x 4 mm that was discovered in 1979 inside the Geißenklösterle cave in the Swabian Alps of south-western Germany…… According to research published by Dr Rappenglück, the figure must be Orion, since the slim waist of the figure corresponds to the Belt of Orion, and the sword he sees hanging from the waist of the figure is easy to see in the real constellation. Moreover, Dr Rappenglück is at some pains to point out that the figurines’ left leg is somewhat shorter than the right leg, just as it is in the constellation. Therefore, the figure on the ivory fragment is Orion the Hunter.………….                                                                                                                               Does the figure represent the constellation Orion, which would make it the oldest known star map with an age of about 32,000 years, or is the fragment merely a testament to the skill of the carver, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the stars?                                         The reverse side of the Orion carving is dotted with 86 notches, which Dr Rappenglück claims is a “birth calendar”. According to Dr Rappenglück, if one subtracts 86 from the number of days in a year (365), one arrives at the average human gestation period, which is around 279 days, or nine months, give or take a few days either way. “

It seems that this paper will be quite extended, due of the data volume aquired by me in the course of the time, and because there are many things inter-related.                             At the begining I will present you an aspect of the tablets wich could be a good starting point. Is not been noticed and not easy to be realised by an average unskilled viewer. Anyway I will analise if real or not, both possibilities. Remember: in reality only one could be true!
This twoo posibillities conducts to little divergent research fields, and has great consequences, because one is aiming to a period of time close to our time and the other one is aiming to much older time and ages.The difference one-between could be as 2.000 years!

1-st possibility (LETTERS)
What is about:
It seems that I am the single one wich noticed that: – upper half of the round tablet is containing a group of signs wich seems to be “allien” or of a “different part or opinion” side. Anyway all the signs on all tablets give the impression of a mixture of signs. Anyway, the signs are very familiar to me, cause I know the signs are from archaic greek alphabets.(interesting, not as easy matching the older Aegean writings, Cretan hieroglyphic, Linear A and LinearB. Why? Because the exact D-shape sign was not used in those writings. Not for moon, nor for measure units.
In archaic greek, at the begining there was different alphabets in different places, from where:”epichoric alphabets” (epichoros:”local”).Eg, for letter D used delta in one place and D in another.For R used P in one place and D in another place. So it’s not easy, because out of this fact could be combination of letters wich give different words. We could have in the left side HP or HD (HD or HR).On the right side could have DDoo:ddoo or rroo ! could be generated many words !                                                                                – If the suposition of Mr. Marco Merlini is true, upon the upper half was hidden by the oblong tablet, in order to hide the message, then we can take in account that mainly or only upper half contain an message, possible in “true writing”.The rest could be seen by passing-by viewers cause for them are only some misterious signs.

Many years before I wondered if there are there the archaic greek signs eta/heta and Rho what would be the monogram for?
Note.                                                                                                                                                    Old shape of eta had 3 horizontal or slanted bars.At the begining was for consonontal eta, and for the sound H,He.That’s why was named also heta. Reminder of this are words like Hera wich in past was pronounced HEra, (words were written begining with H) even if later pronounced Era.In all rest of Mediterranean world was kept H eg. In Etruscan, latin, venetic language and writing.Some years before wanting to know where is the oldest atestation of HP/HD group of signs or monogram, I found that there were some found on Levantine sherds and in Egypt, written vith this archaic eta shape. Image, from


Only a few, course many were written with boxed-eta.
Scientists wondered and said that monogram would be, in descending probabilities for:   – Her                                                                                                                                                      – HerosHercles/Hercules                                                                                                                      – Heros, proper name
After some years of research, I supposed that HP/HD monogram could be for:
Hera,Heros,Horos/horo,Horio,etc. As for :                                                                            goddes Hera=Lady,hero=lord, limit/time/mountain,village.
On the right side, would have :sign +++++ :”Se”: seed,sow,plant/you,your
And DDoo/DDoc: “RoRo/roros” (moisten,bedew/countryside/RURAL)                 Aroros :”plughman”
So possible:
Horos/Horo Roros
Mountain/limit/time/hour country(side),rural

HD          R R o o                                                                                                                                     Hera rhoo,rhou,rroo (from rheo) Note: in greek roo,rhou:”flux”                                                   From The Ancient Greek Philosophy Collection: The Works of Plato, … Phronesis (wisdom), which may signify phoras kai rhou noesis (perception of motion and flux), or perhaps phoras onesis (the blessing of motion), ..

Hera flow,flux,river
In most ancient times, the main deity was a female-one Dione/Rhea/Hera and Zeus was 2-nd.
Also minoans had 1-st order deity an astral female-one, Asasara.                                      Later Ida-Mater/Damater, mistress of animal :”Potnia teron”.

If you asked yourself why I’ve posted in the title Orion, I explain:
– many noticed and supposed that in Vinca-Turdas/Danubian civilisation, one of the Mother-Goddess sign was the triangle. Upon my research (wich I’ve psted in a separate post) I showed that the stylised shape of Orion constellation was the sign of the Mother-Goddess.
– In greek oros/horos is “mountain” probaly coming from a root meaning rise/arise/ high,up. Oros/Horos:”boundary,limit/mountain) has in declination the form Orion/Horion !

From strongs – that SHEPHERDPUPLINUX.US…
ὅριον horion hor’-ee-on Neuter of a derivative of an apparently primary word ὅρος horos (a bound or limit); a boundary line is (by …

IDA related to sanskrit-tamil Ida river. Could be Mountain Ida, rather than river-mountain, maybe IDA:”headwaters,runnel,source,spring”, mountain IDA;”spring Mountain”??

Beside this approach, we could have another set of readings:
HD DDoo/DDou
gr.Hede(here-now) gr.edo,lat.ede (eat) gr.hedus,lat ede “kid-goat””<>DiDou (give!)
Note: there is a stroke inside first D !
And another set:
HP  D B o c

Note: at a close look +++++ and 2-nd D signs are ligatureted !, so Di b o c=Di V o s                      Gr.&Lat.Heros,her:”Lord”/Hera:”Lady” <>DiVoS:gr.GOD,lat.”Gods.divine”

I will stop here and come later back to refine this above.

2.The other possibility:

-Due of the fact that an D-shape sign was not used in any ancient writings before greeks, this was very hard for all before researchers of the tablets.
They had only twoo possible renderings:
– as numbers
– as signs for Moon/Moon phases?

2-nd possibility (AS NUMBERS)

In sumerian proto-cuneiform writing, there is only one instance in wich the sign D was found. Not on the tablets, only in proto-cuneiform sign list (Falkenstein ATU 527). Also as the very precursor of the signs, sumerian tokens (Denisse Schmand Besserat). Nobody knows or even not hypotethised what that sign was for by sumerians !
Folowing the observation that signs folowed tokens, I make an assumption in the reversing-time way that D-shape token and D-sign represented (as later sign), number 60.
Even if one choose that the sign would be a number or Moon this is not taken away the charge to explain the other,rest of the signs !(expecting in an time and writing related context) !!

Even if one take the sumerian approach, out of the number-signs, remain the rest of it. There is known that in proto-writing stage, one sign had multiple meanings.                     So wich to choose !? They say that sumerians choosed the meaning from the context.  But we know wich is the context here ?? NOT !
In minoan (Linear A) writings the phonetics of the signs is not know entirely.                  But even the language is still unknown.
Micenaean is known due to deceased Michael Ventrix.
In Cretan hieroglyphic, Linear A and Linear B the shape “D” was not used. Only some similar different signs for month and measure units!

Many scientists hypothesized one after another, in a long row (K.Massey,R,Kolev,M.Merlini,& al; not know wich was 1-st…) that the DDoo-sequence was intended for moon phases.
I was not sustaining this as my 1-st grade rendering. But I am some-how forced to re-analyse the issue. I did not this till yesterday read that in an paleolithic inscripion (that at the begining) the moon-phases signs could be related to female cycle, so I took this matter seriously back again in study.
This hypothesis has some consistency and support in the folowing:
humans observed exact astronomic time cycles, but
not come to an end and solve the matter of exact time superposition of number of days in the year, so Moon cycle with solar astronomic year
(nor in our time XXI century we have months with 30 and 31 days even with 28!).
– Even one of the great scientists, Dr Rappenglück, consider that was possible that humans even in remote time, to relate lunar phases with human gestation period.
Me: !! I am not at all convinced !
So I took a decision:
No matter how the supposed ancient civilisation of the writer solved the calendar problem or not (searching in tablets for timings/numbers) suffice for me that they noticed some kind of relation and maybe only expressed this in kind of a raw manner,
As could be the graphic representation of the lunisolar calendar. Four seasons,maybe 3 months in every of them. But no matter how many tdays in every quarter of year or in a month, in an analogic way (not digital/numbers) the time superposition is made.
a)Is a matter of further research if they some-how solved or not the problem.There are hundreds of calendars wich are dealing with leap-time issue.
When tried to read, I was conducted in sumerian to “pure-sacred one” (Ku-Dis), in Linear A.B to shepperd: (Linear A Pa-men/Pai-men? gr. “Poimen= shepperd”), also in sumerian to Enki’s (Erth-God) sacred number 40, to death rituals (number 40=nimin-nis(20)x min(2)),etc. Albanian rrok”term” sorok russ.=” Term,40”, rom.”term”….                            Note
Interesting, note that in sumerian MIN:”2” and in egyptian Min/Men:”unchanged,constant,still”
– In minoan language (unknown, not direct related to no language out of a bundle of language familyies, comprising Indo-European,Luwian,hebrew, greek etc.) MIN from – Minos they say to be related also to “still,constant,unchanged”
– there are research papers of Evangelos Papakitsos and Iannis Kenanidis wich traced that Aegean proto-linear writing as a whole, present influence of sumerian proto-cuneiform signs, Also they made the assumption that the initial cretans were in fact sumerians !


If upper half of the round tablets is containing letters,
– We could have in left-side Hera wich was related to nature, conception and family and in the right side those 4 moon quarters. (?)
– Many ancient civilisations begin the time counting and the year with new moon, as surely could be our case ! (1-st sign seem to be new moon) – It seems also that new moon was depicted in neolithic as a sickle having stroke(s) inside.
When I made sumerian reading attempt, I took only 1-2 signs for moon:                               H D signs
Ku sign  sign of Moon-God Sin/SuEn or DIS(1,unique,God)                                           SACRED,PURE ONE/Moon-God ? and for the signs:
D D o o


D-sign:Moon-God/1                                                                                                                           sign OO:”Nigin”
AsSUR one whole…                                                     ________________________________________________________

It seems that could be a lunisolar calendar, (?from the time of Ashur, or from somewhere):

30 day/month  12 month and 360+5 days/year

These 5 days were aded at the finish of the year.

Those 5 days are probably figured by the sign +++++ ?…….or:                                              ++++++                                                                                                                                             D D o o


 SUR/flow Moon/month full >> “one AsSur full,entire month flow

Yes, also DDoo is full Moon with four phases :                                                                              1. new moon, 2. 1-st quarter, 3. full mon, and 4. vaning


Number  Sumerian Akkadian
1 diš,  išten
6  šediš

On Mr.MARCO MERLINI’s “TĂRTĂRIA AND THE SACRED TABLETS “. Investigating the signs on the circular tablet” 

November 24, 2018

         In memory of Sabin Adrian Luca

   ! !  <<<<<<<   A T T E N T I O N >>>>>>>  !


  • Due the fact that Mr.Merlini is believing that the tablets have a very old age (much olders with 2K Years than the real age wich could be in fact)
  • Deep inside beeing not sure  what is in fact that age
  • He is expecting Neolithic and even not think of Bronze age.
  • Not know that proto-writing emerged in the world around 3.200 B.C. (Sumer,Egypt,Indus). No single proto-writing before 3,500 in the World!
  • His reasearch wich is regarding the signs, is extending at an extremely wide time span and too far back in time. The time spanning / period of time/ timeline from paleolithic to late neolithic.                                                                                                                                          S O R R Y, D E E P L Y  W R O N G !
  • He did not realise even now, that the Vinca Civilisations stopped at the verge of discovering the writing.
  • I mean, out of those singleton tablets ( wich could be made yesterday by one as me, who has elementary knowledge of some dispersed ancient signs) no other writing proove that even proto-writing existed in Vinca-Turdas civilisation.
  • So, he is mainly searching in such a big pile of ancient signs as finaly cannot decide, and he DO NOT KNOW WHAT TO CHOOSE.
  • Writing developed as a stringent necesity in high developed societies (Sumer, Minoan)..”high” I mean really high in respect of every single aspect of economical and social activity. (Remember only the Hamurabi code or minoan streets and houses.) The hearth of writing in Europe was in the Aegean. I wonder wich was the supposed path of “Kadmus road”… probably close to that of commerce. The writing emerged close to places where thousends of tablets were found !
  • Nobody knows how cultural transmission happened (by air like flu or how?) Evidences points that Aegean was influenced by sumerians (see papers of Evanghelos Papakitsos and Iannis Kenanidis).Early minoans seem to be native sumerians.
  • There were population movements that only now with genetics developements could be traced.
  • An “laboratory”-like scientific analysis of the sign is stormed by “Mylady Tartaria” story, otherwise introducing more mistery not scientific needed and beeing your own contribution or production.

UPPER HALF:                                                                                                                                 From

First, begining from the left, H-like sign

  The folowing, from

From Marco Merlini                                                                                                                        THE ESOTERIC MESSAGE ON THE DISK-SHAPED TABLET
“A throne that is not a throne
The (sign)is very frequent and well known, with an assortment of variants, in several inventories of ancient systems of writing. The Mesopotamian examples highlight an implausible correspondence between this Transylvanian sign and the pictogram from Uruk ATU 260 1470 or Jemdet Nasr 1471.Badiny forced the supposed similarities selectin g the Proto-Sumerian pictogram1472. Nonetheless, any correspondence in shape is remote1473. These scholars find equivalence only by maintaining that
the Tărtăria sign is damaged in the lower left segmen ts; they reconstruct it arbitrarily in an outline resembling the Proto-Sumerian counterpart.
Correspondences in Akkadian cuneiform are not very clear. It is Labat number 436 according to Badiny with sound TUD, DUR meaning ‘settlement foundations’
1474. However, it is Labat number 99 with meaning ‘Lord’, ‘God’ with a phonetic value EN according to Kolev1475.The sign resembling a tri-rung lame ladder or a limping chair occurs also in Semitic scripts, in particular in the Phoenician alphabet where a similar sign represents the letter heth (phonetic value h),. Subsequently, it became the Latin H. The occurs also in other ancient Asiatic scripts, as well as in
the East Orient systems of writing. In particular, there is a complete graphic convergence with the sign 53 of the Indus script 1476.”
Despite :                                                                                                                                                   -the large excursus wich is comprising almost all close-shape ancient signs                           – not even noticed exactly HET-shape (apropos, sound Kh as in ger. koCH not H!)                 -not found the exact construction of the proto-cuneiform sign KU/GA2 wich has also as our sign 3 horiz. bars                                                                                                                            -not get to a final conclusion and not choosed or found any concrete sign or meaning : (………….In any case, to my thinking it will be productive to explore the possible abstract meanings of the as the opening that introduces the esoteric inscription.”)
– if The (sign)is very frequent and well known then why you not take the bull by the horns ? (romanian exprasion translated < de ce nu luati taurul de coarne>?
2-nd “D-shape sign” on the right,
Merlini:”The second sign on the upper left quadrant is a rounded D-shape with a tail,” me: no tail, scribe shaking hand. It is exactly ATU 527!
Merlini:”In the Danube civilization, its occurrence is restricted to Tărtăria, and it is not present in other ancient scripts. ”                                                                                                  Me: Yes,In the Danube civilization, its occurrence is restricted to Tărtăria but is present in other ancient scripts as:                                                                                                 sumerian,                                                                                                                                        Anatolian writings and alphabets                                                                                                      archaic greek (as for letters D and R),                                                                                             in venetic script, …I’m not squeezing my memory further.

Merlini:”In the Late Neolithic Vinča C culture, the D is engraved on the forehead of a statuette discovered at Medvednjak (Republic of Serbia)1493. Due to positioning, Winn considers this sign as “symbolic”149

Me: In hundreds of statuettes not on forehead there were not cyclops were exactly in the eyes places. (See my post :”Common… in early writing”)More than symbolic, the eye shape is direct related to light through light to deities and sun!

Merlini:”In Akkadian cuneiform, the D is the Labat number 480 with sound DIS, meaning ‘praised one’

Me: yes, but only “one” and not “praised one” because there is no particle there for praise it is only “one” meaning of course the God,praysed-one.Attention, dis much used for numbers; for “one” ment the unique single ONEis +++++ “AS” present on tablet.           1 is “Dis” and “Dili”
Merlini:”At Tărtăria, the tail on the D was incised intentionally. We have to deduce that the ‘scribe’ applied this small auxiliary marker to the root-sign in order to produce a variation to its conceptual meaning or to differentiate some phonetic units of the spoken language. Unfortunately, we are blind concerning the denotation of the D sign and its sound value.

Me: Pitty enough, no sign connection less a given meaning.

COMB-like sign                                                                                                                             Merlini:”As already mentioned in the previous chapter, on the upper right quadrant of the circular tablet, a ligature between the incised on the higher register and the biggest D on the lower register is nonexistent, although common in literature1507″
Me: the ligature exist, but what this element can push to other divergent interpretations remain to be discussed.
….bla bla bla to conclusion:

Merlini:”In conclusion, if the comb-like sign from Tărtăria finds some parallels in the Mesopotamian pictography and in other ancient scripts, the best semiotic correspondences are from other settlements in Transylvania and in Serbia of the subsequent Neolithic Vinča C and Turdaș cultures of the Danube civilization where it is a component of a numeric system

Me: yes could be numeric as 10+5 or 50 ( deceased female’s age), but you only said:” finds some parallels in the Mesopotamian pictography”,did not noticed the exact proto-cuneiform sign AS (one,single,unique)
-In respect of he said above, no given number meaning
First “D-sign”

Merlini:”The crescent moon is visible in the shape of a celestial D1522. The variant

is not recorded in the inventory of the signs of the Danube script.It is very similar to the shape individuated by Gh.  Lazarovici with code 238f, meaning ‘first quarter of the moon’. The same sign was utilized to render the first crescent in a lunar cycle engraved on a stone around the second part of IV millennium BC at Knowth (Boyne Valley, Ireland)
1523. The graphic concept is similar to that at the base of the ancient form of the Chinese character Yue4, meaning ’moon’. In the beginning, the pictograph was a new moon hanging in the sky. Gradually, a vertical stroke was added inside. I also assume the
a s a symbol for the ‘first quarter of the moon’.”                                                                    
Correct:                                                                                                                                                    “At Tărtăria, the tail on the D was incised intentionally. We have to deduce that the ‘scribe’ applied this small auxiliary marker to the root-sign in order to produce a variation to its conceptual meaning or to differentiate some phonetic units of the spoken language. Unfortunately, we are blind concerning the denotation of the D sign and its sound value.However, the Transylvanian D is the same as the sign of the moon on the Chinese divination bones. Is the rounded D-shape with a tail representing the abstract
concept of the Moon (the divinity of the Moon?)”
Me: Yes, could be 1-st quarter of the moon, but out of your rendering ATU 528 of the sign wich has 2 paralel strokes inside, I’ve found an exactly pair of our sign wich has an L-like sign inside.It is the sign SUR.
Second D-sign
Merlini:”The sharp incised on the upper right quadrant finds graphic parallels with ATU 527. As substantiated in the next chapter, if the D is a lunar symbol in several early systems of writing and in rock art, at Tărtăria it stands for the Full Moon as the best suitable moment for human fecundation.
Me:If I am not for precisely ” full Moon” but as I run out of better solution, I agree for Moon (as I found only exact shape ATU 527 but there no indication for sign name nor meaning!)
“o o” signs

Merlini: (directly up to conclusions):”In conclusion, the sequence D– D – O –o

incised on the lower register of the upper right quadrant of the Tărtăria tablet seems to indicate the moon according to the following phases: First Quarter Moon, Full Moon, Last Quarter Moon, and New/Black Moon.”
Me: Yes could be, but the main  posibilities  are :
– o o =sumerian 10 10
– two sumerian signs “o” LAGAB(circle) =sumerian 2xLAGAB=”o o”=”nigin”: “encircle,roaming around,full,total,etc.etc….

Left side,”Merlini:The stylized bow+arrow sign

Merlini:”The bow+arrow sign finds some parallels with pictography from Uruk and Jemdet Nasr: sign ATU721,, with the sound BA, meaning ‘eye’ and also ‘to see’1352. In Ak kadian cuneiform, it has the sound IGI, meaning ‘eye’, Labat number 449 1353. Vaguer is the resemblance with the sign with sound BA (‘offer’,‘give’), Labat number 5135″
Me: Yes, BA (‘offer’,‘give’).                                                                                                                 Ba is by no way is eye, IGI is meaning eye.The Ba (“offer etc,) has one shape, and IGI (eye) another shape.. But seeing the position of the arrow related to the cord, the sign is definitely much close to our sign is Ba !! (“offer,give”).

Merlini:(conclusion) “These observations, when crossed with the identity of Milady Tărtăria as a magic-religious practitioner, open the possibility that the sign on the tablet symbolizes a communication tool utilizing the image of a hunting weapon. It could depict the dynamic, magical moment/action in which the arrow is shot, and the charm has taken off”

Me: Milady Tărtăria’s story is for any help; in my opinion the deceased ~ 5.200 B.C. is not direct related with the tablets (unknown age).No human made any proto-writing signs before 4.000 B.C. other than pictographic!                                                                             I feel so frustated as somebody is recognising that is down, have no drop of energy/resource and signaling indirectly and asking for help…..
Signs >> (double-arrow)
After an excursus of where and in how many instances from paleolithic humans used arrows, he (Merlini) come to conclude:

Merlini”On the circular tablet from Tărtăria, the sign >>represents two arrows in abstract style pursuing the target. It might be indicated by the sign incised below,

, with an unfortunately obscure meaning.”
Me: Fortunately noticed the proto-cuneiform RU-sign (close to >>) but not know the meaning, and that there was also an sign >(wich theoretically could be doubled >> as to form plural)
Double-cross” sign upon Merlini (me:Z-like):  
Image, from  KEITH MASSEY                                                
Merlini:The ” sign”does not find parallelism with the Proto-cuneiform pictogram ATU 295, 1397= Jaritz#560 1398. It is just the duplication of the sign ATU 223 = Jaritz #101,
, which indicates a ’branch growingfrom a stem’, and symbolizes ’grow (large), swell up, bud’. However, the is partially present at Jemdet
Nasr as the 90 grades rotated(JN 47). Regularizing and standardizing the Proto-Sumerian pictograms, Zakar believes to have found the Transylvanian sequence also at Jemdet Na sr ( ), and at Knossos (in the form)1399. In Akkadian cuneiform, the double-bar sign has the Labat n umber 295 with phonetic value PA, KUN, meaning branch’, ‘club’, ‘scepter’
1400. Denoting also someone holding these tokens of authority, it acquired the meaning of someone in power1401. However, some convergences are also with Labat number 467: a ‘god’, ‘the hero’1402
Me: The sign is present from Cretan hierogliphyc through Linear A/B as sign PA2, and is also present coincidentaly in sumerian as PA,”branch” but also as “branch,upper part,supervisor,someone in power,etc”
No wonder by my side: no direct sign connection, the sign remain suspended in the thin air of the Vinca civilisation.Mr.Merlini is bounded to the conception that some-how Vincans wrote. Dissapointment, they made big steps but stopped at the point to discover and use proto-writing!

Merlini:”The analysis of the convergences of the

from Tărtăria with early writing systems evidences a common thread from the Danube script to the Aegean writings. The occurrence within inscriptions of the Danube script documents its use on ceremonial objects of the Danube civilization, and its very rare
presence on daily utilitarian articles confirms the magic-religious significance of this sign.
Me:Not given a chance to sumerians, (apropos Ba+Ru=Baru, barupa”: “magician”                          ;also Ba+Ru=Pa). Nor the slightest chance to Cretan hierogliphyc 2200B.C, or Linear A 2.000 B.C. or even for Linear B 1500 B.C. They wrote for nothing.                                    Again, so sorry.
Those “complex” ideograms on the right side,
Left ideogram/logogram

Merlini:”The finds no obvious correspondences in Akkadian cuneiform. It is paralleled with Labat sign n. 353 by Badiny, with phonetic value ŠA, meaning ‘face’, ‘care’ 1415. But it is the Labat sign n. 172, with sound NE and meaning ‘fire’, according to Kolev 1416. As a representation of a fireplace, a similar symbol occurs on an Assyrian relief from the 9

th century BC, or even older. The sign means ‘throne’ or ‘table’ in the inscriptions of the Hieroglyphic Luwian1417. The assumed convergence between the Transylvanian and the, A330 in Linear A, is unconvincing 1418. In this Cretan writing, the correlated sign is the A3 18,1419.To summarize, even if the (sign)is more or less present in different repertories of ancient systems of writing, it is typical of the Danube civilization and finds the best correspondences within the Vinča and Turdaș cultures as elements of the symbolic code1420. It is not a sign of the Danube script.Its naturalistic rendering indicates it as an altar for fire sacrifice, with three columns that seem to designate three tongues of fire. In the present book, Gh. Lazarovici advances the interpretation and
related archaeological evidence that this symbol represents an altar model, an altar for the worship of fire. Analogies with ancient rituals might support this interpretation. Hindu fire worship begins with an off ering to the three tongues of fire that represent the Orient, the Occident and the central place,followed by an invocation to the divinities. In the Manuscripts from Qumran Cave1, 1Q29 1Q is the “Liturgy of the Three Tongues of Fire” 1421
Me: Has simylarities with Cretan hierogliphyc and Linear A&B as showed in my papers.
So you’re right It is not a sign of the Danube script .It is of Sumerian/Aegean origin.            Closest is proto-cuneiform SA (“sieve”) wich was and is my rendering
An altar, yes, but not necessary an altar for fire sacrifice.An altar for burning incences in many rituals.Gr.eskara lat.asa
Right ideogram/logogram
Merlini:THE ORANTE-DANCER The ‘orante-dancer’,(sign 13a and 13b in fi g. VIIC.6b), incised on the right of the and on the edge of the quadrant, occurs only at Tărtăria.
Me: Not like an orante dancer but like a female astral deity!                                              There it is not in upper part the sign UD or PIR “pine” it is udu,utu:SUN” and precisely U:day,SUN
At the base is the sign AB or UNUG :”abode
So if it is 90% sumerian sign then close to “Sun-shrine/abode” and in our case could be with equal chances also an female astral deity, simylar to TANIT (70% same graphics) and much close than Tanit a deity as ASASARA.
It seems that at minoans and before them, topmost deity in the Balcans was a GODDESS not a God.
See my Cretan hierogliphyc-Linear A,B reading attempt.
Merlini 2011
“sign of SAMAS, Sun-God”
PROTO CUNEIFORM SUMERIAN SIGNS (Late Uruk)                                                                ALL SIGNS ARE PRESENT ON TARTARIA ROUND TABLET
Sumerian proto-cuneiform signs are from  from UCLA
(otherwise also take a look at Mr. Fackelmann sign-list )
AB present in the ideogram of Sun-abode=sign of city LARSA
present in ideogram of sun-abode, sign of city LARSA
AMAR (calf)
ARARMA, sign present on emblem of cty Larsa (sun-abode)
ASZ,AS (upper half,right, up)
BA bow-arrow sign
ENSI Lord, (here first sign) present in downward half, left side, most underside
Ga2 ! but there is other sign rotated 90deg,) wich is our sign in upper first from the left
(same as above Gur)
sign GAR read NINDA (portion,cereal,BREAD), possible present as ?close? imitation in D D o o sequence
sign KU (upper half utmost left)
Sign LAGAB “hole,circle” present in D D o o sequence
LAGAB LAGAB (2 times LAGAB=or “2 round circles”=”NIGIN” present in D D o o
also NIGIN “whole,total,enclosed,roaming around”… etc etc.
sign LISZ, present in downward left quadrant doubled, as >>
sign MAS present as the cross wich divedes tablet (?remember”twin, kid”?)
sign PA “overseer inspector” on extreme down-leftward sign/quarter
PA3 possible those 2 signs in the quarter mentioned above
same quarter, sign RU ……forgot meaning
sign SUR “rain,flow,press,squeze,warrior,,etc.etc” 2-nd D in the D D o o row
SZA, SA         present as such in the downward side, right, 2-nd from right to left.
U4 It is day=SUN! present in LARSA stamp=sun-God abode sign on downward side, first from R to L
sign UDU sheep ?related to the cross wich divides the tablet?
also UDUb
UNUG quite same with AB “house,abode” present in sun-God abode
twoo rounds twooxLAGAB ..number 10 10 =20

Common traits in the very beginning of writing

November 22, 2018

Some other scientists found that one particular pictogram was used in different places in writing .Quite slightly different in shape. It is about the eye. But every scientist showed mainly symilar eye-shapes for only twoo different places. I discovered that there was an much extended phenomenom. I will show you more than 4-5 places in the world. The explanation I’ve found is the fact that humans have the same physical body, and nervous system (read basic way of thinking).

But there was another pictogram used in the same semantic field, the fish. There is no other simple connection for humans for the idea of light other than eye. Light is entering in us through eyes.Close yes and have no light. Eye-light is kind of short-cut between, eliminating every word or philosophy upon.

It is true, light is coming mainly from Sun, but if you figure sun thinking possible turn in first time to celestial star and the light is only 2-nd, close-associated.

I discovered that it seems that the eye-shape was used for logograms and phonemes for light. I suppose the fish-shape was used for bright-light or “bright,shining”.

I will show you some 6 exemples:

A (1). Vinca-culture.So many statuettes with the eyes depicted as letter D with, or without eye-lashes. My personal suppozition, (expressed one year before) was that upon if the sign has an associated meaning that was the light, whatever sounded. For “shiny-bright” they used fish. Vinca-culture 6.000-4.000 B.C. Image, from Neolithic Vinca Terracotta Human/Bison Head – Ancient Art & Antiquities

Image, from

The fish was for the idea of bright (bright, shiny-God), the same to identical later sumerian Oanes and old hebrew Dagon ( dag was for fish). Vinca-culture, Bel Brdo 6.000 B.C. See, from


Imagini pentru fish-god Bronze AgeThe god Dagon first appears in extant records about 2500 BC in the Mari texts and in personal Amorite names in which the Mesopotamian gods Ilu (Ēl), Dagan, and Adad are especially common. (my note, phoenician Dagon, hebrew Dagan)

B(2) Jiahu writing

                                                                                                                                                  From;                                           Here’s a collection of 目 (eye) characters in the oracle script:


.T “the former qualification, in subsequent periods used to denote
the distribution of above all rations to dependent workers and animals, seems best translated in archaic
sources with ‘inspected’ (‘and found to be available’, pictogram “eye”), roughly corresponding to later Sumerian gub or gal, or possibly gurum (IGI+GAR). 10 ” My note:probable reffering to sign IGI?

“The Sumerian noun is typically a one or two syllable root (igi “eye, e2 …”

Imagini pentru proto-cuneiform sumerian                                                                                                      From SUMERIAN PROTO-CUNEIFORM SIGN LIST;                                   Proto-cuneiform sign Di:                                                                                                                                                                                                                           From:  New Indology: Sumerian and Indo-European: a surprising connection                

B(2) Indus script From

C(3) Hieroglyphic Cretan ?Do/Du”?                                           

Hierogliphyc Cretan, sign No.005 From

Note: Unknown rendering

Linear A. From

The major obstacle here is the missing phonetic value for Linear A *301 (the ‘slave’ or ‘acrobat’ sign). Since it is not an easy task to find the missing value (more on this in a later post), we have almost no clue of the meaning of this word. Unless we make a bold move and substitute a fitting Etruscan-Lemnian stem here. The best (given the context, and the rare *AI diphtongal cluster) appears to be the etruscan word-stem *AIS = “God, Divinity”. If so, the value for *301 needs to be of either the S- or the Z-series (perhaps *ZU). Notwithstanding, the reading for a libation text beginning with ‘This/The god…’ appears incorrect. Therefore we have to assume that whatever A-I-*301-… meant, was more of a “divine gift” or “divine sacrifice” than being simply ‘god’ or ‘gods’.

Image from The most peculiar Minoan sign ever seen

My note. Close to egyptian eye !! “the eye of Horus”

Linear B, sign “Zu?” From Richard Wallance’s blog,

Me: yes, “Zu” as P.I.E.-root “Di”>DIas/Zeu,Zou,Zu,Zeus:”light”

From  Documents in Minoan, Luwian, Semitic and Pelasgian  Fred Woudhuizen file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/Documents_in_Minoan_Luwian_Semitic_and_P.pdf     

“In their table of comparisons, Olivier & Godart plausibly propose the correspondence of CHIC038 “gate” to L32 ya, CHIC092 “horn” to L55 ru, and CHIC005 eye to L101 zu.”
49 ……………                                                                                                                                       “This inference is further emphasized by the fact that the Cretan hieroglyphic “eye” sign is more remotely related to Luwian hieroglyphic *191, which depicts three pairs of eyes in a row and stands for the all-seeing sun-god, TIWATA, ti6—thus leading us to the syllabic value ti6 according to the acrophonic principle.56 “

Socoteala “sumeriana”, fazele Lunii in jumatatea superioara a tablitei rotunde ?

November 18, 2018

Atentie!                                                                                                                                                              Aceasta postare nu este o o descifrare sau citire a unui presupus continut scris real. Avand in vedere ca semnele nu apartin unui unic sistem de scris ci mai multora, pagina are un caracter pur didactic. Are rolul de a incerca si testa diferite scrieri in idea ca pe tablite s-ar fi folosit unul din ele. Semnele de pe tablite apartin mai multor sisteme de scrisi dintr-larg interval de timp si care au folosite in diferite arii geografice. In niciuna din incercari semnele nu s-au incadrat intr-un singur tip de scriere, totdeauna au ramas semne care au provenit din alte scrieri (sau din necunoscut). Cele mai multe semne provin din cele sumeriene proto-cuneiforme.Apoi privind asemanarea, in ordine descrescatoare este aceea cu semnele Linear A/B si cele Anatoliene. Semnele din jumatatea superioara a tablitei rotunde par a proveni din scrierea arhaica greceasca.Cel mai degraba aceasta “adunatura” de semne pare a fi rodul imaginatiei bogate a cuiva.Dupa cum au constatat A.Falkenstein si A.A.Vaiman, (aceasta fiind si parerea mea ferma) autorul nu a fost un scrib, avea doar vagi notiuni privind scrisul in general si nu se stie ce a urmarit. Exista multe elemente de neconcordanta precum si altele care scot tablitele din tiparele si normele uzuale ale  logicii, scrisului si intentiilor oneste.

======                                                                                                                                                      Socoteala “sumeriana”, fazele Lunii in jumatatea superioara a tablitei rotunde ?

Foarte multi cercetatori (vezi Adam Falkenstein, Aisek Abramovici Vaiman ) au avansat ipoteza ca scrisul tablitelor nu este sumerian autentic ci doar “de factura sumeriana”



DWritten Records.
1.Daca tablitele sant de inspiratie sumeriana, nu prea cred ca ar fi vorba de fazele lunii. Nu stiu din ce motiv, sumerienii nu au prea folosit in scris Luna ca si corp ceresc. Luna ca si corp ceresc era figurata in imagini ca si o secera in pozitia “tine apa”.Nu au avut termeni distictinti. Foloseau pentru Luna calendaristica/month si pentru Luna corp ceresc/Moon (Id,Idi,ITI/SuEN,Sin), semnul pentru soare, pe care aplicau numarul de 30 de zile.

tat5b                                                                                                                         Sau in scris ma simplu, (banuiesc ca pentru luna calendaristica/month) doar semnul “30”:
1230D <<< U+U+U | ESH / EŠ = 30 (numeric) | UŠU3 | SIN = moon

See “30”


Nu au folosit deloc forma de literei D.Cat priveste “fazele lunii” singura aparitie de care stiu este o inscrptie din paleolitic din Europa (18.000 B.C.!).Asa ca strict d.p.d.v. al fazelor lunii aceste faze puteau sa fie figurate pe o intindere in timp (vechime) de multe mii de ani, pana inspre zilele noastre.Inafara de durata egala a ciclului Lunii cu cel menstrual, se pare ca cunostinte legate de fertilitate in cadrul ciclului menstrual (asa cum maimulti cercetatori au speculat) apar doar cu putin timp inaintea erei noastre.

2.Daca tablitele sant de influenta sumeriana, se pare ca nu ar prezenta nici numere

Ex.1 (socoteala proto-elamita):



GRAIN-RATION RECORD FROM PROTO-ELAMITE SUSA is read from right to left. The text begins with a «hairy triangle», thought to be the issuing authority. Next is a «plow» sign that is probably a field worker. The number signs that follow continue at the right of the bottom line: 1 X 60 + 3 X 10 + 3. Next is a sign like a sheaf of grain; it means barley. Last is a capacity number: 6 X 6 C + 1 C + 1 m. The sense is that 93 workers receive two minor units each (Source: Alan D. Iselin).
Noi avem la Tartaria semnul SUR (primul D) si ? posibil imitatii de numere sumeriene ?:(citire de la dreapta la stanga):semnele 00: (2×6=12C)unitati de capacitate
+ semnulD:D(“1 masura” m)
“12c+1m (12 unitati capacitate+1 masura ?”)                                                                            Ex.2 Sumerian:
Imagine,    sau

Retineti ca sumerienii puneau unitatile mari in stanga apoi descrescator spre dreapta; citirea o faceau de la stg. La dreapta
Asa avem si noi pe tablita :
Semnul SUR (primul D)si un numar Doo.
SUR  ???


(D-urile sant mai mari ca 0-urile! Deci D-ul este “60” si nu “1” iar o-urile nu sant mari,O=”3600” ci mici o=”10”:

Din A New Edition of the Proto-Elamite
Text MDP 17, 112 Laura F. Hawkins


Figure 3.3: Relations between length measures on proto-cuneiform tablets

(1 nindan = 6 meters The basis of the system was the nindan, with a size of approximately six meters,)
SUR D(60) si oo (10 10)
? Sur 60 + 20 = sur 80 ?

Daca am fi avut numai numere, am fi avut:
D D o o = 1,1 10,10= 2 ,2o. dublul lui 20; 29×2 = 40
Automated joining of cuneiform tablet fragments – PURE – University of …
….. und nimin „40“, was offensichtlich aus *niš-min „2 mal die 20

Daca am scrie denumirea cifrelor

MIN(2) Nis/ni(20) =NIMIN(40)…….iar ne lovim de sorok =40…….. SIRARA6) was a temple complex in Lagash – it may also (or instead) have been a city as mentioned in The Royal Chronicle of Lagaš.[1] It has been suggested that the city-state known as Sirara was also called Nina or Nimin which was probably a seaport.[2]
Daca tablitele sant de inspiratie sumeriana, nu prea cred ca ar fi vorba nici de fazele lunii.
1230D <<< U+U+U | ESH / EŠ = 30 (numeric) | UŠU3 | SIN = moon See “30” Daca nu avem numai cifre, am inlocui cifrele cu denumirea lor. Am avea Sur giš/geš niš ?? 3.Atunci sa analizam semnele +++++ Dv D o o Semnele sumeriene sant: AS SUR Dis 2x LAGAB

Din ASZ2


As:”unu , unul” Appendix:Sumerian Swadesh list – Wiktionary 22, one, aš. 23, two, mina. introduction to sumerian grammar – ANE Languages.COM

Din by DA FOXVOG – subject among other scholars specializing in Sumerian grammar. …… values such as sumun/sun “old,” súmun/ sún “wild cow,” sumur/súrangry“,

Din Preferred Reading Sign Name Meaning sur SUR v. to divide, to press, to brew 4 Sumerian Phonology…/42TurkicAndSumer/HamoriFSumerianPhonetics&soun… The basic pronunciation of the sounds of the Sumerian language, that is it’s “phonemes” and the key sound changes it ….. *śurwe > sar ~ šur=to stabb, pierce, insert;

Šúr: Sumerian. Adjective. a-Aggressive. b- Violent. c-Enraged. Súr: Sumerian. Adjective. a-Determined. b-Self-assured. Šur: Sumerian.…

the unity of hamito-semitic and sumerian language families 1 – › THE_UNITY_OF_…
204 Sumerian šur, sur “ to rain, to flow” 204 Sumerian
As-Sur: Aššur is the name of the city, of the land ruled by the city, and of its tutelary deity from which the natives take their name, as did the entire nation of Assyria

Nu este Dis:”unu” pentru ca cifrele in general erau facute prin imprimare.

Urma lasata pe lut pentru numarul 1/(“dis”) cam asa arata la sumerieni:


Semnul GAR, din


Semnul gar in proto-cuneiform nu era imprimat ci zgariat si arata putin diferit: Din Historical Epistemology …


Doua semne Lagab=Nigin “intreg” engl.whole

reading sumerian names, ii: gilgameš – … › jcunestud.64.0003
by G Rubio · 2012 · Cited by 11 · Related articles
in Sumerian and Gilgameš in Akkadian. ….. LAGAB.LAGAB = nigin (niŋin) = nin3 in Ea 1: 46–47a (MSL 14, 178) and

Unicode Cuneiform Fonts – HPM Hethitologie-Portal Mainz › …
For Old Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian sign NIGIN (MeZL, n° 804) = LAGAB-LAGAB ( U121B8+ U121B8), we get

Chapter II – Springer Link › content › pdf
interpreted as a contracted LAGAB.LAGAB. In all four … LAGAB.LAGAB – as nigin, “to make surround”, which gives some sense. In the

The ancient settlement of Nigin was part, with the cities of Girsu and Lagash,

The Vocabulary of Sumerian – jstor
by JD Prince
etymological study of the Sumerian word-list is attended by. ‘ Die Entstehung des …… ‘canal,’ lit. ‘collection (nigin) of waters’ (Br. 11676). I The Babylonian .

Maximillien De Lafayette . Nigin: Sumerian. Noun. The whole amount. Nigin: Sumerian. 61.

Encyclopedia of Cosmology (Routledge Revivals): Historical, …
Norriss S. Hetherington
In this compound term, the Sumerian element “NIGIN” corresponds to the meaning”to move in circle” or “to encircle,” hence the semantic force of the whole encompassed by heaven and …

Nigin ;”intreg,tot”

+++++ AS
Dv D o o SUR Dis/Gar Nigin

Curge un intreg / ? o colectare/intreaga ploaie/rau

              !                 Unul(zeitatea!)

                      Ploaie       paiine      tot                 !

In sfertul din stanga al tabletei:


H D = Ku/Gu Gar?/Dis?

1.Ku Gar= ku ninda  (semnul gar se citeste ninda:”cereale,paiine“)

Ninda-ku:”mananca paine

2.Gad (deity) | Revolvy
The English word god continues the Old English god (guþ, gudis in Gothic, guð in Old ..

2.Ku:”pur, sacru” ; dis;”unu”

“Unu,Cel Sacru”                                                                                                                                     ——————————————————————————————————-

  1. 2018

Doua sau trei sisteme de scriere permit citirea celor 3 tablite pentru ca cuprind aproape toate semnele prezente pe tablite. Este vorba despre scrierile sumeriana,cea cretana si cariana. Singura scriere care cuprinde cele mai multe semne este cea sumeriana. In incercarile de citire am abordat cu egala deschidere fiecare scriere.Pacatul este ca daca prima nu mai prezinta multe necunoscute, in a doua se fac progrese in schimb nu prea exista specialisti pentru scrierea si limba cariana. Eu stiu ca exista doar unul in lume in varf, ADIEGO.

Cu toate ca am incercat sa fac citiri folosind sxrierea proto-cuneiforma sumeriana, inca am unele intrebari si nemultumiri.

– Daca cateva semne nu sant identice cu proto-cuneiformele (ex “D”), au fost imitate? Cine si cum le-a imitat ?.

– Daca au fost niste migranti din Orient, se pare ca au fost familii care nu s-au integrat complet in populatia locala.Banuiesc ca este vorba de meseriasi in prelucrarea metalelor proveniti di aria Gutium-Siria.

-Daca ar fi reale citirile acestea ultime, cum puteau sa faca referire la ei ca fiind peregrini? Singura explicatie ar fi ca gutii, mai putin avansati cultural au folosit termenii existenti in acel timp pentru ei !?


“During my years of research, I observed that most scientists tend to “fall in love” with their own theories: and that is where trouble starts. After all, you should be critical with your own results, even more so than with the results of others. Only so can you ensure the quality of research you provide.”(ANDRAS ZEKE/Hu

 ……asta inseamna ca revin.Inafara de o posibila citire cu zeitate ploaie “paiine”,” tot”,

va propun:


Sumerian / English

As-Hur/All-seeing-one          AS-SUR”all seeing-one:/ONE WARRIOR







RAZBOINIC  UN   CALATOR/da roata                 !vedeti pe tablita cei doi “UN,unu” sant legati !!

Šúr: Sumerian. Adjective. a-Aggressive. b- Violent. c-Enraged. Súr: Sumerian. Adjective. a-Determined. b-Self-assured. Šur: Sumerian.…

 Sumerian / English           Warrior/Sur

niĝin [ENCIRCLE]. niĝin [TOTAL].

The Class Reunion—An Annotated Translation and Commentary on the …

  1. Cale Johnson, ‎Markham J. Geller… see tashiru sahharu (see sahhiru) turning (Kou 50) sahhirat āli = Sum. uru nigin roaming around the city’ 251 sahhirat duri = Sum. bad nigin roamingaround…

Sumerian Lexicon | Linguistic Typology | Linguistics – Scribd   gur 4-gur 4) [NIGINarchaic frequency: 11]. to surround. to halt. concatenation …Sumerian /

English                                                … Nigin/Wander/(to) Nig-Inim-Bala/Interpretation

 to wander {vb}  RO                           ahoinări                                                                                                                                                 a cutreiera                                                                                                                                               a vântura                                                                                                                                              a umbla                                                                                                                                                 a străbate                                                                                                                                             a pluti                                                                                                                                                     a ocoli                                                                                                                                                    a călători

Nigin “a calatori in jurul, a inconjura, a da tarcoale, a se vantura, a cutreiera, a hoinari


2: MAN ; 20:NIS

Some Reflections on Numerals in Sumerian towards a History of … – jstor by IM Diakonoff

THE SUMERIAN NUMERALS HAVE MORE THAN ONCE since Samuel …. number of Middle Indian and Middle and Neo-Iranian … (a) without a suffix, as, e.g., I – /as/, 2 – /man,min/,.


  1. M. Murdock, Acharya S · 2014 · Religion Stele from MesopotamiaUr-Nammuwas the builder of the Great Ziggurat at Ur, the best … Ur-Nammu Menes/Manes, Manis and Mannus


Apoi DD oo = MIN NIS > ? MINIS ?

2(doi): “MIN”   20(douazeci):”NIS”

Neo Babylonian Sign Lists [CDLI Wiki] › wiki › doku › id=neo_ba… Mar 16, 2016 · Neo Babylonian Sign Lists. Work in progress. Filter: ….. Labat 471 / Borger 708, man, niš, ešra = 20.


 Mini (popolo) – WikiVividly › lang-it › wiki
Secondo la mitologia greca, i Mini – agg. minio, minia, minie, minii – (in greco Μινύες, ….. The adjective indigenous is derived from the Latin word indigena, which is based on the

 MINIS, Μινύες,. minoans !??                                                                                                              ————————————————————————–

In stanga, semnele Ku GAR= ku ninda= ninda ku Ninda-ku:”mananca paine”
PDF] old akkadian writing and grammar – Oriental Institute – University of …

Aug 6, 2010 … NINDA KU “they eat bread” (= Sumerian ninda {-ku -e; cf. also the .


Despre TIMP si ZEI sau HR prezent pe tablita de la Tartaria

November 16, 2018

Atentie!                                                                                                                                                  Aceasta postare nu este o o descifrare sau citire a unui presupus continut scris propriu-zis. Cu atat mai mult cu cat avem de-a face cu semne proto-cuneiforme, si deci in consecinta cu  proto-scriere. Avand in vedere ca semnele nu apartin unui unic sistem de scris ci mai multora, pagina are un caracter pur didactic. Are rolul de a incerca si testa diferite scrieri in idea ca pe tablite s-ar fi folosit unul din ele. Semnele de pe tablite apartin mai multor sisteme de scrisi dintr-larg interval de timp si care au folosite in diferite arii geografice. In niciuna din incercari semnele nu s-au incadrat intr-un singur tip de scriere, totdeauna au ramas semne care au provenit din alte scrieri (sau din necunoscut). Cele mai multe semne provin din cele sumeriene proto-cuneiforme.Apoi privind asemanarea, in ordine descrescatoare este aceea cu semnele Linear A/B si cele Anatoliene. Semnele din jumatatea superioara a tablitei rotunde par a proveni din scrierea arhaica greceasca.Cel mai degraba aceasta “adunatura” de semne pare a fi rodul imaginatiei bogate a cuiva.Dupa cum au constatat A.Falkenstein si A.A.Vaiman, (aceasta fiind si parerea mea ferma) autorul nu a fost un scrib, avea doar vagi notiuni privind scrisul in general si nu se stie ce a urmarit. Exista multe elemente de neconcordanta precum si altele care scot tablitele din tiparele si normele uzuale ale  logicii, scrisului si intentiilor oneste.

====================                                                                                                                      Tentativei de citire a semnelor folosind semne asemanatoare sumeriene proto-cuneiforme  nu-i dau mare credit, pentru ca semnul sumerian “Ku” nu arata tocmai asa si nici semnul “D” nu era inscriptionat prin zgariere ci numai prin apasare=imprimare, rezultatul fiind oarecum de forma “D”.                                                                                                                                                                                                   Deasemenea nici citirii folosind scrierile Linear A,B nu le dau credit mare, intrucat desi exista semnul PA3, nu am gasit vre-n semn inscriptionat exact ca si un “P’ sau “D”.Chiar in ipoteza ca D-ul reprezinta luna si folosind acceptia “MEN,MENO,MENE” este adevarat ca mi-a iesit PA(PAi?)-MEN care cumva seamana cu Poimen,”Pastor”.Cine stie, poate ar insemna PA(radacina pentru a pazi) si MEN:”constant”. Eu am observat inca acum mai multi ani ca jumatatea superioara a tablitei contine inafara de semnul +++++ litere grecesti.Mai precis din alfabetul arhaic grec care contine litera Heta (eta arhaic).Este adevarat ca la o adica si semnul +++++ ar putea fisemnul din alfabetul arhaic cretan (Eteocretan) Se/Su,etc.                                                                                                                     P.S.                                                                                                                                                        Nu pot sa va ascund nici faptul ca am suspicionat christograma lui Hristos, dar nu am gasit nicaieri in lume monograma HP ,HPistos/HRistos (ci numai pentru Heros/Hercules/Herod) ci numai “XP” (labarum) !                      ______________________________________________________________________________________

Revenind la un presupus sa zicem HP,                                                                                       Nota.                                                                                                                                              Initial au existat variantele epichorice ale alfabetului arhaic greces (epi-choros=pe loc=local) in care ba intr-un loc pentru D foloseau delta si in altul D iar pentru R intr-un loc foloseau P si in altul D                                                                                              Aceasta grupare consonantica este extrem de veche.                                                             

Din Horus and time A dialog on comparative philology from the ANE list November 1997 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 12:47:07 -0600 (CST) From: Subject: Re: ane Horus and Time At 04:13 PM 11/8/1997 -0500, Geoff Graham wrote:                                                                             “….the relationship between time and the sun ‘s movement that prehistoric Egyptian wordsmiths personified in the name of their solar deity [Hrw] should not logically be considered the ancestor of the same relationship that inheres in the ancient Greek words for (1) “season” [hora] and (2) the limit of a circle [horos] that yielded [horizon], in light of the fact that these Greek words were also clearly derived from a prehistoric consonantal root [HR].  ………                                                                                                     …….Of course, the preceding analysis differs with the prevailing opinion of Indo-Europeanists who have attributed Greek [hora] to a hypothetical PIE root [YER] and Greek [horos] to no root. However, in the absence of empirical proof that these Greek words were derived in one way rather than the other, that way must be inferred by using the principles of deductive reasoning to unite the available evidence. ………            …………. I was, thus, wondering what should prevent an objective observer from logically hypothesizing that the aforementioned Greek words are, in all likelihood, derivatives of a known Egyptian root [Hrw], rather than of two hypothetical Proto-Indo-European roots, .….”                                                                ______________________________________________________________

Eu de mai multi ani, am vazut si am urmarit cu un gen de obstinatie (puteti zice si fixism) aceasta presupusa radacina HR ; – am gasit in bucati de obiecte ceramice gasite in Egipt si Levant, mai des decat in aria Egeeana, monograma HP inscrptionata cu forma arhaica a lui eta, heta care initial se pronunta h,he. Cercetatorii spun ca ar reprezenta zeita Hera sau Heros sau nume propriu Heros, eventual Hercules(Hercles).

6ebe3-nwgrid                                ____________________________________________________________________

In ce ma priveste, am suspicionat atat Hera cat si Heros.Heros declinat are si forma HeRo.A insemnat “DOMN” si zic cercetatorii ca initial si literar a insemnat “protector/aparator”.

Din            The word hero comes from the Greek ἥρως (hērōs), “hero” (literally “protector” or “defender”),[3]                                   Nota.                                                                                                                                                        1.Initial, titlul de erou era dat dupa moarte numai celor larg cunoscuti si recunoscuti pentru fapte eroice.Ulterior ritualurile de “eroizare” s-au aplicat si oamenilor sa zicem mai “obisnuiti”.                                                                                                                        2.Retineti ca langa au fost gasite niste oase (este adevarat ca datate la cca.5200 B.C. !?) ,dar important este faptul ca arheologii au dedus ca a fost vorba de o a doua ingropare (engl.”secondary burial), cand oasele curatate au fost reingropate in cadrul unui ritual.               Aceasta dubla ingropare s-a practicat in Grecia chiar pana in zilele noastre !!

In legatura cu timpul, am prezentat o eventuala citire HeRe (albaneza “timp”)…in dreapta gasind rrrok (albaneza”termen”) sau Bg. surok (ca si romanescul soroc=termen si rusescul sorok=40 gasit si de B.Perlov). Interesant este ca si gr. Horos inseamna “termen, limita, granita,domeniu”                                                                                                      Ex.”horos Dios: “domeniu zeiesc, a lui Zeus” > templu

Strong’s Greek: 3724. ὁρίζω (horizó) — to mark off by boundaries, to determine › greek
Original Word: ὁρίζω … 3724 horízō (from horos, “boundary, limit“) – properly, to set boundaries

όρος See also: ορός, ὄρος, and ὅρος Greek Edit Pronunciation : [ˈo̞ro̞s] Hyphenation: ό‧ρος Etymology From Ancient Greek ὅρος (hóros). Noun  όρος • (óros) m (plural όροι) term (word, phrase; limitation, restriction) definition, stipulation clause (law) article Acc.Sing. oro/horo

In acest caz am avea in stanga timp?termen,limita si in dreapta tot termen (soroc)         De notat ca in ritualurile crestine si poate nu numai cica sufletul bantuie prin preajma oamenilor si numai dupa 40 de zile (sorok=40!) ritualul este terminat si sufletul ajunge la cer, numai atunci fiind liberi cu adevarat si cei ramasi si cel plecat.

Nota. Cuvantul har “farmec, dar nemeritat” are o origine foarte veche.Acest cuvant ca si simbolul crucii au o origine cu mult mai veche dacat inceputul crestinismului

Speculations on the Xártus Ceisiwr Serith Main Page ->Proto-Indo-European Religion

Here is where they etymology of the word comes in. It is based on the root *H2/4er-, “to fit together in an appropriate and aesthetically pleasing manner; to dovetail; to harmonize.” The Xártus will take the direction that is most appropriate; that fits the context best, the one that is, above all, the prettiest. Remember that “cosmos” is related to “cosmetic.”

Eu ipotetizez aceasta radacina  lingvistica (*H2/4er =Har) este reprezinta grafic de cruce , este icoana ei, de poate 6-8.000 de ani. Este simbolul lucrului bine facut si al armoniei universale.

Coments on Marco Merlini’s “Lunar Menstrual Chronograms from the Danube Civilization to procreate a Child of the Moon”

November 14, 2018


Careful/ Attention !                                                                                                                                               This post is not a decipherment or reading of any actual written content of Tartaria tablets. Given that the signs do not belong to a single writing system but to several, the page has a purely didactic character. It has the role of trying and testing different writings, in the idea that the tablets would have used one of them. The signs on the tablets belong to several writing systems over a long period of time and which have been used in different geographical areas. In none of the trials did the signs fall into a single type of writing, there always remained signs that came from other writings (or as coming from the unknown). Most of the signs come from the Sumerian proto-cuneiform -shaped ones. The signs in the upper half of the round tablet seem to come from archaic Greek writing. This “collection” of signs seems to be the fruit of one’s rich imagination. As A. Falkenstein and A. A. Vaiman found, (this is also my firm opinion) the author was not a scribe, he had only vague notions about writing in general, and it is not known what he intended  or he was after. There are many elements of inconsistency as well as others that take the tablets out of the usual patterns and norms of honest logic, writing and intentions. =====

Lunar Menstrual Chronograms from the Danube Civilization to procreate a Child of the Moon | Marco Merlini –

My coments:                                                                                                                                               Some researchers found an intriguing fact that the signs “D D o o” situated on upper-right side of the Tartaria tablet are high challenging.


Sumerians did not figured the moon as D.

Click to access Sumerian_Cuneiform_English_Dictionary_12.pdf

1230D <<< U+U+U | ESH / EŠ = 30 (numeric) | UŠU3 | SIN = moon       See “30”


For me also, at the time supposed to be written the tablets there were no invented yet D-shaped signs.

Close shape has sumerian proto-cuneiform numbers.


D D o o could be:


1, 1, 10, 10. so, “21 portions of grain”

Even if we have the signs: “D1 D2 o o(?”c”?)”

the sequence there are:

“D1”-sign, identical with ninda (bread) sign wich in proto-cuneiform is in the shape of a D with an inner stroke paralel with that left-side,

“D2” sign is identical with proto-cuneiform D-shape numbers, but sumerian used to imprint the stylus not scratching/cutting.

“o” was used for “10”

“c” was not used ?

If “D1(Ninda) D2 o o” would be: bread. 1(60) 10 10″ so “21 bread”

But I am stressing that sumerians not made numbers only by imprinting.

So the tablet was no written by an native sumerian nor we have proper/genuine sumerian writing. The same opinion had before me A.A.Vaiman “On quasi-sumerian tablets from Tartaria”. He found some 5 other clues (as me also 5) , mainly different technique, other than sumerian on the tablets.

I supposed on my part before to have “D”-shape sign as moon.





But found non-sense with those twoo repeating D-s folowed by apparent 2 full-moons. As phisical phenomenom, in reality full/black moon and in-between quarterrs are inter-changing, not folowing/repeating the same sequence.

Also I made my mind to have in the left side those “HD”-like signs as for Sun-Moon.

From                                                                               Radical 72 meaning sun or day is 1 of 34 Kangxi radicals


an H-like sign with 3 horiz, strokes (ri) as for Sun, also I thought of He(ta) as for Helios.All in vain.

In the Linear A reading aproach I took “H-D” sequence on the left side as Pa-moon=Pa Men, close to poimen, “shepperd”                                                                                             From

One of the best renderings, maybe even better than sumerian-one is Mr. Merlini’s interpretation as the phases of the Moon.                                                                                      His paper and aproach is outstanding.With a single reserve:                                                          Could have there the Moon phases but in my opinion the moon phases were not yet related at that time to an “female fertility calendar”


I made myself searches on astronomy-biology relation throught the time and nowdays, and I found:

-Out of average lunar timing/cycle (rotation) wich has

1. the time in wich the moon shows the same phase and

2. exact the time of one complete revolution, we have an medium/average cycle of 28 days.

I found that out of an medium time of the above twoo, (average same round 28 days) time cycle of moon and female cycle there is no exact or direct relation or match.

Especially due of the fact that every female have an personal cycle independent of the moon phases.

In mithology I found stories to become pregnant at full moon.Nothing proved real.

More than this, fertility female human is expanding in an quite large time extention.

More than this the ovulation time is so individualised that even fatigue, stress, body temperature, ilness and manyother factors are conducting to a situation that:

-nature are aware of all good and bad influences and ovulation occur only when the best conditions are met.If not best kind of optimising occur.

Women’s cycles are a little more…unpredictable. Our systems are a complex biological loop that can be affected by stress, hormones, sickness, and even exercise. It’s common for people’s cycles to vary between 21 days and 35 days. Even women who report regular periods can have an unpredictably long or short cycle once in a while. Here’s why: each month, the body tries to release an egg at the best time to achieve pregnancy. If the body senses a fever or stress hormones, there’s no use releasing an egg into a body that’s too hot, stressed, or hungry to keep it healthy. Our bodies are willing to wait a little while to keep the egg optimized and ready for fertilization, and that’s when we’re faced with a cycle that’s longer than usual.

Menstrual cycles seem to fall along roughly the same timelines, and it can be tempting to use the moon’s cycles to track an ovulatory or menstrual cycle. Tempting, but unless you’re ready to pick out baby names, you might want to rethink it. Studies that link the moon with fertility or contraception have been inconclusive, and for a good reason: every woman is different. Every cycle can be different.

Even if (from same above):”It can also be beautiful to consider yourself part of the fabric of the natural world. It can be empowering to remember that cultures throughout the world and history have looked up into the night sky and seen a powerful and unabashedly female figure shining down on them. The moon’s waxing phase, as it fills out and brightens the night sky, is an especially vivid symbol of pregnancy and fecundity, which are, of course, directly related to menstruation.”

The term lunar effect refers to real or imaginary correlations between specific stages of the roughly 29.5-day lunar cycle and behavior and physiological changes in living beings on Earth, including humans. In some cases the purported effect may depend on external cues, such as the amount of moonlight. In other cases, such as the approximately-monthly cycle of menstruation in humans (but not other mammals), the coincidence in timing reflects no known lunar influence.

A considerable number of studies have examined the effect on humans. By the late 1980s, there were at least 40 published studies on the purported lunar-lunacy connection,[1] and at least 20 published studies on the purported lunar-birthrate connection.[2] This has allowed several extensive literature reviews and meta-analyses to be produced, which have found no correlation between the lunar cycle and human biology or behavior.

Out of this, in a time (neolithic ! Merlini/tablets 5300-6300 B.C. )when writing was or not discovered and people were not acustomed with numbers and counting, how could one remember,relate,corelate what day was before/ 40 days/ after when first prenancy simptoms occur !?


Sufficient bad, if

– many scientists were and are supposing that Vinca civilisation was on the verge of discovering writing (in fact sure riched the mnemonic/iconic stage with maybe forever lost meanings)

– many also said that especially Tartaria tablets carry kind of writing

– most fervent sustainer of Danubian writing is Mr.Marco Merlini,

– especially Tartaria round tablet shows signs wich could carry (if not sounds/words via syllabograms) absolutely sure at least proto-writing via proto-cuneiform signs.

So pity enough that the world toughest and constant sustainer of Danubian writing if choosed to propose those moon-phases, in the situation that in fact we could in reality have writing,

is going many steps way back to an stage before proto-writing. Moon phases are in this case are (local or not) mnemonic signs coresponding to moon phases.

But if one is looking at the signs=moon phases on the tablet or on the real moon on sky not necessary is drawing conclusions on moving asters or female lunar cycle.


Pity enough for Mr. Merlini, contrary of my first admiration reaction, I found that this “moon-phases” idea is not so new and was not his discovery, nor the first-one to display for the first time.


1.MERLINI: Chronograms from the Danube Civilization to procreate a Child of the Moon

Constantin-Emil Ursu, Adrian Poruciuc, Cornelia-Magda Lazarovici (eds.), From Symbols to Signs, Editura Karl A. Romstorfer, Suceava, 2015: 133-200and

2.R.KOLEV Bab Sky Science Collection 01 Abstract | Babylonia | Astronomy – Scribd › document › Ba…

by Rumen Kolev A COLLECTION of writings from 2000 – 2010 …. DECODING of the TARTARIA TABLETS By Dr. Varna.22May-15 June 2008

3. Keith Massey,

November 21, 2008

” Here is Quadrant I:

The semicircle struck me as a probable moon symbol. But what does a moon represent? A reasonable option is to make a moon stand for the number of days in a lunar cycle. As i sat there, I wasn’t sure myself of what a lunar cycle is exactly. I knew it was something short of 30 days. That led me to an intriguing possibility. What if the other inscription in Quadrant I is meant to also convey the number of days in a lunar cycle? What if Quadrant I is a sort of legend, showing the values that will be operative elsewhere? Now, the other inscription in Quadrant I appears to be three lines in a row with two lines pointing out in each direction.

Perhaps each line stands for 10 and the lines pointing out are meant to convey subtracting one or two days from that sum. That would theoretically bring us to the number 28 or 29, which isn’t far from the lunar cycle. Later at home with internet access, I was able to get the info that the exact lunar cycle is29.53 days. Now, I know what I just presented isn’t a slam dunk. I’m going to ask you to consider it, however, in light of how this hypothesis plays out on the rest of this particular tablet.”

Mr. Massey, women have cycles but moon has phases !


November 14, 2018

Careful/ Attention !                                                                                                                                          This post is not a decipherment or reading of any actual written content of Tartaria tablets. Given that the signs do not belong to a single writing system but to several, the page has a purely didactic character. It has the role of trying and testing different writings, in the idea that the tablets would have used one of them. The signs on the tablets belong to several writing systems over a long period of time and which have been used in different geographical areas. In none of the trials did the signs fall into a single type of writing, there always remained signs that came from other writings (or as coming from the unknown). Most of the signs come from the Sumerian proto-cuneiform -shaped ones. The signs in the upper half of the round tablet seem to come from archaic Greek writing. This “collection” of signs seems to be the fruit of one’s rich imagination. As A. Falkenstein and A. A. Vaiman found, (this is also my firm opinion) the author was not a scribe, he had only vague notions about writing in general, and it is not known what he intended  or he was after. There are many elements of inconsistency as well as others that take the tablets out of the usual patterns and norms of honest logic, writing and intentions.                            =====

TARTARIA SQUARED TABLET (with hole) SUMERIAN APPROACH                                                             Image, from

Tartaria tablets

Aknowledgement                                                                                                                                        The signs on the tablet are close to:                                                                                                                – Sumerian (in wich have all the signs), and at some distance                                                                         –linearA/B and carian                                                                                                                                 Note                                                                                                                                                   Evangelos Papakitsos and Iannis Kenanidis allready noticed that Aegean proto-linear script is related to the sumerian-one. More, they suppose that early minoans settlers were sumerians.                                     There are some writing attempts, main sumerian-related decipherments  are that of A.Falkenstein, A.A.Vaiman and Rumen Kolev.         I made some posts with commentaries regarding their attempts.                   ——————-        CROSS DIVIDED TABLET      ————————                                       From Early Numeration – Tally Sticks, Counting Boards, and Sumerian Proto …                                                                                                  The Sumerian MAŠ sign with the word-meaning of ‘(male) goat‘ was a … a cross came to represent goats and sheep in the Near Eastern clay ..                                                                                                                                             ————————————————————-

We have folowing signs
– upper side, those little three D/moon-shaped?-signs (No.2). The picture is from

1.From                     sign  3(N08)  This is number “3”; we have same signs but in a row, not column.                       Note If were disposed in an triangle would be “mountain/underworld)                         Upon Winn and Merlini, the signs could not represent numerals but Merlini”some kind of time recording”. Yes, time recording could be.The signs seem to be made in traditional proto-cuneiform technique , (by pressing).
me:—————————————————————–                                                                            2. In sumerian proto-cuneiform these kind of signs were used to mark numbers.Could not represent number 3 .                                                                                                                                                     3 Not could be 30 .  30 was “ooo” ! Othervise 30 was related to sumerian time keeping (with the base 60), and reprezent a month (30 days in a month), but yhe sign month was an U(day) sign with  three DDD inside.
Sumerian used an specific sign for month, an sign wich couples the sign U (day) with the number 30. It is not this sign here. From    (in the middle)       From Note. In sumerian proto-cuneiform writing, there is only one instance in wich I found the sign D .Only in proto-cuneiform sign list (Falkenstein ATU 527).   Also as the very precursor of the signs, sumerian tokens (Denisse Schmand Besserat). Nobody knows or even not hypotethised what significance had that sign for by sumerians ! In the Denise Schmand Besserat paper the sign is in the cask/vessel/recipients column.

Table from (original table from Mrs. Schmand Besserat paper)                                 See column IX sign “D” ! unknown meaning!                                                                                                                       ———————-                                                                                                                                  because on the tablet the signs are pointing to right >>> (not1230D U ESH 30 thirty SIN moon)                                                             As counting/ measures,:

? Sum. Sign GAR

Sumerian Beer – Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative –
by P Damerow – the sign. GAR designated, in fact, daily rations of barley prepared for workers from a certain amount of grain. The grain was probably, in order to make it …As number, (number 1); 60? There were used 2 D-like signs (~imprinted~) little-ones for 1 and quite bigger-ones for 60/                                                                                                       From wikimedia commons File:Sumerian pre-cuneiform number system.gif

Sumerian Beer – Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative –
by P Damerow – the sign. GAR designated, in fact, daily rations of barley prepared for workers from a certain amount of grain. The grain was probably, in order to make it …

——–    sign  DDD  ——–                                                                                                                                              The grain sign and those of units/portion must be related even because are close one of each-other.           From                                      1230D1230D U ESH 30 thirty SIN moonU+U+U | ESH / EŠ = 30 (numeric) | UŠU3 | SIN = moon

<<< My final rendering: Due of much earlyer using of numbers than for anything else, we could have, and due of the orientation/pointing, we have no 30/Moon, but :                                                                                         “DDD”:         “number 3                                                                                                                     ————————–                                                                                                                                  same pic from :                     Near-by signs twig-like : >->->-         (No.1)  Fig 3                                      Merlini”tree of life /nature sprouting in three months“; no matter that in neighbouring Aegean was Cretan hierogliphyc 025 and in Linear A was the sign TE:”cereal”                           From Sumerian “sze/SE” “barley.grain” !!


ŠE niga, še

Image,  Sign and Image: Representations of Plants on the
Warka Vase of Early Mesopotamia                                                   Image result for inanna proto cuneiform

My final rendering of this sign, taking acount that it seems to be figured out doubled: From    |SZE~a&SZE~a|                                                                                                                                        2xSZE=2xSE                                                                                          “CEREALS,GRAIN,BARLEY” ….and proposed reading, for all above signs :

“3 ratios of grain/barley” , but better:  “3days, one-man 3-day grain ratio”                                                         ——————————     Downward,                                                                                                                        tartaria_greseala_gramatica

See that both red-encircled signs.Every of them was ment to be read as such, isolates.   So coresponding to a separate single meaning for every sign.Not to form words by combining the signs.
This interpretation is the direct result of the fact that the signs are phisically isolated in kind of houses/boxes.
Y-like sign on the left, (No.3)Fig 3

The Proto-Sumerian Language Invention Process by John A. Halloran PAPa@t PAP~a@t
pab, pap, pa4: father; brother; man; leader
paþ[LUL]: leg.        pap: (cf., pab; pa4).                                                                                             ………….Or BAD ba9, bad, be

From A New Edition of the Proto-Elamite
Text MDP 17, 112

        §4.1.2. The precise meaning and function of N2 in proto-cuneiform is not known. It has been suggested that N2 in proto-cuneiform is the precursor to the sign BAD, with the later readings uš2/ug7 attested in the Ur III and Old Akkadian periods (Damerow and Englund forthcoming), including at Ebla (Butz 1981: 338), and in these later texts it is clear that it bears the meaning “sacrificed,” or in the case of humans, simply “dead.”

Figure 3: The Early Convergence of N2 and BAD.
SIGN > convergence>BAD,TIL,US,UG

Even if N2 is used to denote dead or sacrificed animals in the Uruk corpora, the evidence for this is weak and the texts themselves are inconclusive. It is more likely that N2 in proto-cuneiform denotes the entities it counts as “other” or “special.” The meaning “dead” may then have been later attributed to it due to the confluence of the N2/“TIL” and “BAD” signs.   ………………… I suggest that proto-Elamite N2 was an independent development derived from proto-Elamite N1 (which, along with the other basic numerical signs, was a direct borrowing from proto-cuneiform). Regardless of whether or not it was an independent development in proto-cuneiform and proto-Elamite, it is clear that N2 was used to designate whatever it was used to count as “other,” or distinct from the usual or majority object being counted. In the case of proto-Elamite this could possibly indicate a difference in gender, in worker status, or in type or amount of rations to be received. In proto-cuneiform, perhaps N2 indicated that a different type of grain was used to make the beer til: to be ripe, complete; to pluck; to put an end to, finish; to cease, perish (iti, ‘moon’, + íl, ‘to be high; to shine’ ?) [? ZATU-644 archaic frequency: 65; concatenation of 2 sign variants] .
tìla, tìl, ti: n., life (tu, ‘to be born’, + íla, ‘to lift, carry’).
v., to live; to keep alive; to survive (with -da-); to dwell; to be halted (singular stem; cf. sig7).

bad, be: to open; to let out; to go away; to be at a distance; to drive away; to separate, remove
(regularly followed by rá; cf., bara4 and semantics of bar) (open container with motion away from)
bàd: n., (city) wall [? EZEN archaic frequency: 114; concatenation of 3 sign variants] .
v., to climb, ascend.

Sumerian 1(one)=”dil”

Also on very upper side/extremity, in the middle “twoo  Y-like signs” . The closest shape is the sumerian sign BAD:

BAD:”to open, diverge, die

My reading of “Y”-sign is
BAD :”to go away; to be at a distance; to drive; to separate; cease,perish                          (DEAD) MAN

_________ b o r d e r _______separation______ l i n e ____________

The folowing sign (N0.4),Fig 3 is much close to sumerian proto-cuneiform: AB .                                      Anyway, M.Merlini choose to have an absolute separate opinion to others (A.A.Vaiman,R.Kolev&al, included mine), and choose for :                                                         “a cup for collecting sacred liquid: !?   

From    Sign “UNU”                                                                                            This stands for – divine name + the sign UNU – . What is interesting to note is that these geographical names, for example UD+UNU (Larsa), or SHESH+UNU (Ur), seem to be direct adaptions of the Early protoliterate City Seals. This becomes clearer still when we note the cuneiform sign UNU, a part of the geographical names, (when flipped vertical) appears to be a direct adaption from the ‘base’ or ‘stand’ in the seals. It symbolises the abode of the deity, so UD+UNU, is the home of the Sun god, and the UNU is a part of his temple or ziggurat. And here we see the ePSD entry for unu as dwelling:                          “unu [DWELLING] (1511x: Lagash II, Ur III, Old Babylonian) wr. unu6; unu2; unu “banquet; dining hall; the most sacred part of a temple; seat, throne; dwelling, domicile, abode; temple”                                                                                                                           From                                

aba  “AB”                                                                                                                                              Note There are other signs also for temple:                                                                                                                                       Sign reading:temple,house”      

————————————————————————————————–                                            Next is folowing an “insect”-like sign, (……………as one my take the vertical line as the body and the rest as legs.) <No.5>Fig 3

                                                                                               Merlini: If  remained at “tree of life“, yes a good rendering ! If a crypto-sign, “vegetal or solar sign” not as better as before.Luckily he remain at “full blossoming/holy twofold tree”
This sign is also isolated,”boxed”
My first connexion or thought seeing so many spike-like lines was of:                                      AN

anan: n., sky, heaven; the god An; grain ear/date cluster (‘water’ + ‘high’).
v., to be high.
adj., high.
prep., in front.
Wich could be as long as AN sign contain a cross, and superposed other X-es totaling a number of 12 spikes.
Close could be also the sign: SZENNURa
szennura1 (composed of 3 signs GISZ “wood”

From › stream › ApproachesToSumerianLiterature › PiotrMicha…                      Full text of “Approaches to Sumerian Literature”
“including wood, plum (sennur),”

But IS NOT cause of paralel couple lines(2×3)x2=also 12.Our sign has not couples of paralel lines.

I will change from reading AN sign:”sky, heaven; the god An “ ,to                                    cdli: Proto-Ea                                     sze-nu-ur, szennur (GISZ/GISZ). 623, se-esz3, szesz. 516, sze-esz ……/File:Cuneiform_sumer_gi… Sumerian cuneiform sign GIŠ (meaning “wood“). Giszx(Din.Din)

From                                         the Sumerian gis ges-tin ‘the tree of the drink of life,’ usually signified ‘the vine,’ ges-tin being ‘grape wine,’ but it may have primarily denoted ‘palm wine.’ “


Final reading: “sacred tree/tree of life”                                                                                            —————————————————————————-                                                                           Folowing, (also isolated,”Boxed”),a “cat/donkey-like head” sign <No.6>Fig 3

  It is not proto-cuneiform DARA sign (goat)                               From Ancient to Modern: Archaeology and Aesthetics Chi, Jennifer Y., and Pedro Azara, e
… Pennsylvania Sumerian Dictionary,” http:// html. … avatar for Enki’s boat is dara3, usually translated as “wild goat” with no further ..

Sumerian Cuneiform English Dictionary 12013CT – bulgari-istoria…/Sumerian_Cuneiform_English_Dictionary_12&#8230;.

DARA3 ~ IBEX |durah (dara3) [89x] = wild goat, mountain goat | cf.

From DARA3~c

The sign is close to : UD5~c “female-goat” ?

ud5c                                                                                                                                                 Sumerian Lexicon – IS MU…/Halloran_version_3.pdf de JA Halloran – ùz, ud5, ut5: she-goat

by Iurii Mosenkis

“The first tokens (related to the Sumerian or pre-Sumerian hieroglyphs) which use began about 9,000–8,000 BCE in PPNA Mureybet in Syria and Ganj Dareh in Iranian Zagros. E. g., the token sign for ‘sheep’ (about 7,000 BCE) depicted as the cross might reflect the homonymy between the names of the Sun and sheep in Sumerian and Dravidian (Sum. uz, ud, ut ‘she-goat’, udu ‘sheep’ : Proto-Dravidian *jōḍ- ‘goat’ > Proto-Gondi-Kui *jōḍ- > *ōḍ-ā; Tamil, Malayalam utal. ‘ram, he-goat;’ Sum. utu ‘the Sun,’
ud ‘the Sun, light, day’ : PD *oT- ‘to burn’ > PND *od- or/and PD *uḍ- ‘to boil; hot);’”

I am not 100% for it cause our head is between squarre and triangle not so squarred as above sign, but our head is slightly much close to a down-pointed triangle, so much close to: AMAR                        amar

amar: calf; young animal (áma, ‘wild cow mother’, + re7, ‘to accompany, plural’)
Eg. áb-amar: mother cow (‘cow’ + ‘calf’).?
Final reading of sign:                                                                                                                  AMAR: “CALF” Diminutive of vitulus (a bull calf).

No matter if bull-calf (for wich the sign is much close) or goat (we have on pictographic tablet a goat), the sign is related to SUN
——————————-b o r d e r———– l i n e —————————–
Folowing in right extremity twoo signs.
This one on upper side (above No.7).                                                                                      Merlini:”the rhomboidal sign could represent the vase for pouring out the blood of the sacrificed bull (who’s head is showned in the previous cell)………..I’m so sorry….

The sign conducted me first to see an head with hornes,like a bull or goat.
If so, the head is seeing to right.>>>

Now I come back after surveyed entire tablet and I am confident to choose AMAR:”CALF”

Much likely was composed using folowing signs:HI    hi SAR2(HI):”to be numerous

And twwo signs:BAR bar

From Sumerian Lexicon by John A. Halloran bar: n., (out)side; soul, innards; fleece [BAR archaic frequency: 306].
v., to open; to uncover, expose; to see; to remove; to be absent; to release; to peel, pare, shell; to select; to divide; to split; to distribute; to keep away                                                        Hi-  BAR BAR

Sumerian Chinese – Forgotten Books
—. HI BAR,. ‘ spread out extended of a net and other things

(Reduplication means many and is enhancer)

The Class Reunion—An Annotated Translation and Commentary on the …
J. Cale Johnson, ‎Markham J. Geller –
The habitual character of the action is thus represented by the reduplication in {bar-bar} in the Sumerian and the use of a habitual nominal stem in Akkadian.

Hi-Bar-Bar:”be numerous,multiply,SPREAD OUT”

I am stressing, don’t know if theyr actual devellopement stage was one of proto-cuneiform or begun using proper cuneiform signs obtained using ligatures ! lagab

And lal_times_lal
Two times LAL

We have the sign LAL2xLAGAL wich is read NIGIN and/or NANGA
饞嚦饞喐 饞嚦饞喐 LAL2.LAGAB
(ePSD;聽Akkadian Dictionary) 751+755 482+483

NIMEN,NIMIN (nis-min=20 x2=40)The Sumerian Language, An Introduction to Its History and … › the-sumerian-language-…
Descripción: The Sumerian Language, An Introduction to Its History and Grammatical Structure – Marie-Louise Thomsen… … kim ‘to change’ kar ‘to goltake away’ kud.r ‘to cut’ kdr ‘to act as an enemy, t o change’ kGi.6 ‘to be troubled’ 14 ‘to carry’ 1u.g ‘to swarm’ nigin ‘to wander
nigin ‘ to wander’ pad.1 ‘to live (sing. tar …
The Sumerian Language, An Introduction to Its Histor

nigin5, 7, 8, 9, nimen(3, 4, 5), nanga(2,3,4); naga district, province (Akkadian nagu(m) I, ‘region, district; coastal area (area litoranea)’[14
The End of the Dynasty of Nimrod-Enmekar (§§185-240) › content
Heb. peleg = region and/or watercourse, Sumerian nanga, nigin or nishiga (or, nishima ), Akkadian nagu, nangu = region, or more specifically an irrigation region. (The … [nigin5(LAL2xLAGAB)
LAL×LAL.LAGAB Borger: LAL2.LAGAB, Sign, niĝin5 121B8 LAGAB | niĝin2 [214x] = encircle, go around

The Early Stages of the Sumerian City at Tell Zurghul: New Results ……/321156232_The_Early_Stages_of_the_Sumerian_City_..theSumerian city of Nigin, the third city

Nero, etimo – Agorà Magazine…id&#8230;
… nigin (2). n., enclosure, circle; capacity;whole (cf., kilib and gur4-gur4) [NIGIN archaic frequency]. v., to halt, turn away; to turn round; to start over; to surround; to enclose ….. [5] John Alan Halloran, Sumerian lexicon, Los Angeles, Logogram

Now see how the head of the BULL(SUN) is consisten also with reading LAL2.LAGAB, Sign, niĝin5 :”to turn round; to surround; to enclose “ wich could be applied to the Sun.

3. na-anNan(NISH2ni8-ishi)-ĝa = Nanga = Peleg. The unusual spelling of the name may be taken to indicate that the name read originally Nishiga (or Nishima) was pronounced later Nanga. (For nigin = nishima see ePSD s. nigin5, Lexical.) Heb. peleg = region and/or watercourse, Sumerian nanga, nigin or nishiga (or, nishima), Akkadian nagu, nangu = region, or more specifically an irrigation region. (The peculiar way the name is written, viz. with the signs[or:nish2].ni8[or:li].ish[i]-ma[or:ĝa], has led to the idea that the name is “Na-an-gish li-ish-ma” [“May he listen (lishma) joyfully (nangish)”], as nish2 is more commonly read gish, and ni8, more commonly read li.) The word nigin (otherwise nanga or nishiga etc.) is also written with the sign BULUG (in which case it means a boundary of a region or a boundary marker), Akkadian puluggu or pulukku, which is the same as the Heb. peleg. According to Genesis 10. 25, it was in the days of this patriarch that the “earth was divided,” which implies the creation of geographical (“earth”) regions, as well as the dispersion of tribes. The Hebrew root p-l-g means not only “divide (regionally)” but also “divide (linguistically).” Peleg means “(man of) different regions” and “(man of) different languages.” The historical context is the dispersion of nations and consequent confusion of language at the Shinar Tower.

OOOPS!…………….I have also NIGIN on the round tablet!

But if want my opinion,the sign is not a complex,ligaturred,composed-one because I am expecting that the writing pertain to pre-cuneiform fase in wich were used simple signs,So sufficient the sketch of the bull(head)

The sign above No.7 Merlini:”the cup for worship that collects the sacred liquid”………..even much sorry….Mister Merlini is an outstanding story maker.

The same sign AB for “house,temple”
I wished to be and tempted to be


Cause ZAG is meaning “shiny” as double-axe is.
If Professor Waddell is right in identifying the “Sumerian Father-god” Zagg with the Cretan god Zeus (**2) he, too, offers a link between the Babylonian and Cretan religions. We have already seen that Sargon was perhaps sometimes called Zaggisi, (**3) so probably both Zagg and Zeus were mythological representatives of

mpressions of two cylinder seals (Sumer) and glyph of ‘ingot’. The person at the feet of the eagle-winged person carries a (metal) dagger on his left-hand, clearly demonstrating the link with this metalware catalog.
Note the one-horned bull below the person who has his foot on mountain-summit.
Sumerian sign for the term ZAG ‘purified precious’. The ingot had a hole running through its length Perhaps a carrying rod was inserted through this hole.

Bouth signs:

Up-> “Be numerous,multiply,SPREAD OUT”

Down-> “House

By chance I found that those very signs we have, associated are signifying:


– But we have no the first sign this goat-shape even not shure at all that is depicted a goat-head,
– Think our sign is an made-assembled signs resulting an word

I am convinced that Nergal is the netherworld aspect of the sun-god, on the basis of late mystical texts which I had looked at in the Erra thread.
There appears to be a connection between Nergal and Shamash. It has indeed been argued that the Mesopotamians saw them as alter-egos (Porada 1948, 47; von Weiher 1971, 26, 31), Nergal governing the underworld and Shamash the sky
Dalley mentions in Myths from Mesopotamia p. 283 that Nergal/Erra was the “patron of copper smelting”

This is the first time I have heard of this important point, as it would accord with the idea that Nergal is a god of fire…………. Nergal and his connection to mining

! Nergal is quite opposite to first reading cause only at the begining was a pair of Sun-God Utu/Shamash is specific the Godd/ess of Mid-day sun,
Geschichte des Altertums: Erster Band. Zweite Hälfte. Die ältesten … – Translate this page
Eduard Meyer Ne-unu-gal „Herr der großen Wohnung“ für Nergal (ebenso später Amar-ut „Kind der Sonne (?)“ für Marduk, dingir-pa „Gott des Griffels“ für …
,later a God/ess of the underworld and DEATH !

Despite the fact that I found the sign AMAR:”CALF” in the before section,when encountered that last horned-like sign, my mind was toward goat and some-how attached to GOAT (despite the fact that could be the head of a bull.Did not realised or thought)
Now I understand why combined sign BULL & HOUSE

The God Resheph in the Ancient Near East
Maciej M. Münnich -Sumerian lists of geographical names it would be better to translate it as “City/seat of the bull = Nergal” by analogy to the similarly constructed Sumerian names such as: SES.UNU’“ (Ur — seat of Nanna), MUSUNU“ (Zabalam — seat of inanna), UD.UNU’“ (Larsa — seat of Utu); see Katz …

Now I change my opinion from:
up= composed sign; downAB:”house” :50%
Reading them as a pair: N E R G A L :50%

To the opinion:


Now we have on entire tablet:

month portion grain
life tree CALF NERGAL
To open , let out

Sumerian Cuneiform English Dictionary 12013CT – bulgari-istoria…/Sumerian_Cuneiform_English_Dictionary_12.pdf
sign evolution, that it goes from the proto drawings to the cool Sumerian …… amar-utu = MARDUK (bull calf of the sun god utu – northern hemisphere 12 day winter solstice celebration of.

Possible the tablet was ment and used in an fertility ritual.
The were giving grain offering and addressed to the Gods ? An (Sky-God) and Nergal (pair of Sun-God or underworld deity) ?

Even remain other second close-by possible interpretation of BAD sign with an reading :”drive/go away” or read as til: “to be ripe, complete; to pluck; to put an end to, finish; to cease, perish” ,”distress/death” reading in the situation there was encountered draught and famine folowed by people death.

Ooops!…apropos of double-axe and Nergal:
“The God of Jupiter is the Lord of Magicians, MARDUK KURIOS of the Double-headed Axe.” – Necronomicon, p. 30 (AVON Edition).
Laurence Austine Waddell, in The Makers of Civilization in Race and History, (1929), sheds some light on the significance of the axe:
“The Double-Axe sign for the God Zeus in Crete also occurs as a sign for the god ZAG [1] in Sumerian. It is found in the inscription of Manis-Tusu’s grandfather; and it is obviously a fuller form of the diagrammatic axe-sign in Sumerian, which has the phonetic value of ZAG or SAG, and is defined as ‘axe, sceptre, two-edged sword.’ And significantly this axe-sign is a title in Sumerian of ‘The GREAT LORD’ (NAR-GAL) [Ner-Gal from his fatal smiting still later became the God of the Underworld.], a martial reflex of the Father-God ZAGG, SAKH, or SAX [2], i.e., Zeus, who became latterly the ‘God of War’ in Babylonia; and Manis’ father SARGON worshipped the weapon of the God ZAGG as we have seen.”

The both signs: that one above No.7 is for Bull and No.7 is for “temple,abode”

The TEMPLE,ABODE of the Sun-Bull, the house of Sun-Bull/Nergal,(Sun’s pair)

Do not consider this work as an ultimate finding and interpretation.
When begun some years before my proposed goal was only : to proove and show that Tartaria Round tablet is containing proto?writing?.
Now the same goal with both tablets.I am not pretending at all an accurate reading. Schollars (sumerologists) could take and analyse the tablets and afteward give and show their opinion.

Autenticitatea descoperirii tablitelor de la Tartaria

November 12, 2018

Ar putea parea impropriu sa spunem ca ar putea sa nu fie autentice, pentru ca totusi cineva le-a inscriptionat.Daca privim astfel autencititatea, ele sant autentice.                Daca insa privim din punct de vedere stiintific, ca ele au fost gasite impreuna cu cele 26 de artefacte (incluzand oasele) si in acelasi loc, precum si fapul ca se sustine ca apartin unei perioade foarte indepartate a antichitatii, (fapt inca supus unor dezbateri aprinse) atunci putem supune discutiei acest subiect.   Avand in vedere ca :        – Mai multi cercetatori au exprimat mai pe fata sau mai reticent ipoteza neverosimila ca Nicolae Vlassa le-ar fi “plantat“, si ca ele de fapt au apartinut colectiei de artefacte a Zsofiei Torma                                                                                                                                        -Cercetatori de renume si ii amintesc aici doar pe trei Gh.Lazarovici J.Makkai, apoi  si A.A.Vaiman, unde primul vorbeste de un mesaj care nu face parte din categoria scrisului, iar ultimii doi de o imitatie a unui scris sumerian                                                                         – In cercetarile mele, in mod independent am gasit ca ar semana foarte mult cu un scris sumerian proto-cuneiform, dar tablitele nu sant sumeriene si nici scrise de un sumerian. Acest aspect a fost explicat in amanunt doar de doua persoane, A.A.Vaiman si de mine.Exlicatiile fiecaruia contin aproximativ cate 6 puncte.                                                  -Ca am observat ca jumatatea superioara a tablitei rotunde contine semne care au constituit litere in alfabetele arhaice grecesti si in unele derivate ulterior din ele

Astfel, am ajuns la concluzia ca semnele sant similare cu cele proto-cuneiforme,ca nu contin mesaj scris explicit decat jumatatea de sus a celei rotunde. Ca si cum mai degraba decat ca cineva ar fi cunoscut semnificatia acelor semne sumeriene si sa le inscriptioneze transmitand un mesaj, doar a avut acces la semne si atat.

– Pagina de fata este o incursiune a unui fapt aparent banal siintamplator, ca gasisem ca o pura coincidenta ca in prescurtarile latine a existat D.D.o.c., (secventa prezenta in tablita rotunda in dreapta sus) fara ca sa iau in serios aceasta pura coincidenta.

In urma investigatiilor mele am aflat ca:

I. Zsofia Torma, ca urmare a :                                                                                                             – necunoasterii in amanunt a inceputului scrisului in lume (in particular in Sumer) si realizand altfel corect ca o mare civilizatie a lasat acele semne (Vinca), dar si cedand tentatiei catreia multi nu i-au rezistat, si anume de a cauta si asocia originile populatiei care a creat mii de artefacte din colectia sa (vedeti ea recunostea ca sant de dinainte de venirea maghiarilor in Ardeal si nu a incercat sa asocieze direct maghiarii cu ele) a intuit partial corect o posibila legatura a civilizatiilor din Orient cu cele din Europa.                     -Ba mai mult, cineva a scos o lucrare dupa manuscrisul ei, “…Ardealul si civilizatia sumeriana?” in care sustinea ca semnele gasite pe artefacte chir provin de acolo.Lucrare la care nu am avut acces decat partial ;

  • torma-zsofia-sumer-nyomok-erdelyben-11430507-eredeti

eram doar curios in ce masura cunostea semnele sumeriene. Exact nu stiu.Stim ca si N.Vlassa era convins ca sant asemanatoare cu cele sumeriente, ba chiar le-a atribuit vechimea exact cea a inceputului scrisului in Sumer.Ca sa sustina asta lua artefacte cu gramada descoperite de Z.Torma in diferite situri si apartinand probabil unor perioade diferite fiecare.

  • II.Karoly Torma, fratele ei era arheolog dar s-a specializat si in Epigrafie.
  • Inschriften aus Dacia, Moesia superior und Pannonia inferior. Wien, 1882. (Kül. ny. az Archaeol.-epigr. Mittheilung-ből)
  •         Are lucrari de cercetare ale multor situri romane, printre care si cel de la Sarmisegetuza.Ba chiar adescoperit un castru roman, aflat culmea, pe proprietatea sa si astfel a putut fi bine protejat.                                                                                                                            A primit la un moment dat titlul de doctor, dar dezamagitor cumva pt.mine, doctor in litere.
  • A Hunyadmegyei Történelmi és Régészeti Társulat Évkönyve 22. – REAL-J › MTA_HunyadMegyTort… Dr. Márki Sándor. 6. Lugosi dr. Fodor András levelei. Ferenczi Sándor — — 18 …… Dr. Torma Károly egyetemi tanár f Porto d’ Anzio.
  • Banuiesc ca limba latina nu avea secrete pentru el.A apartinut confesiunii romano-catolice. Intr-o lucrare a nu stiu cui (sa verif., poate a lui) in se face referire la titlurile de doctor primite de preotii Bisericii Catolice din Ungaria si Ardeal.
  • Negotiating Violence: Papal Pardons and Everyday Life in East …


    Gabriella Erdélyi – 2018 – ‎History

    … and Everyday Life in East Central Europe (1450-1550) Gabriella Erdélyi … Lazarus decretorum doctor plebanus de Eczelj decanus generalis) MNL OL, DF .

  • XX. évfolyam 2013. 4. szám – FONS – Forráskutatás és Történeti … › images › Fons Torma István közreműködésével szerk.: Zsoldos Attila. ….. alárendeltjeit: Ivanicsi András kánonjogi doktor (decretorum doctor), zágrábi.
  • Acel titlu se numea “decretorum doctor” si se traduce si interpreteaza ca “profesor in legislatie=doctrina catolica. Latinii prescurtau :”D.=”decretorum” –D.o.c.=”doctor“”

HP DDoc =HeRa/HeRo decretum doctor, “Doamna/DDomn doctor in doctrina canonica”

Acum va pun intrebarea, unei posibilitati:                                                                                cine ,unde si cum ar fi putut face un gen de amuleta-amintire-cadou de acest fel?         Cadou al unei rude (Karoly pt.sora lui ) sau de alti colegi din Imperiul Austro-Ungar pe unde a tinut ea conferinte ?….in preajma doctoratului primit de ea?                                        Nota.                                                                                                                                                      La colectia Zsofiei Torma au avut acest doar 2 persoane Roska si N.Vlassa                    Titlul de doctor honoris cauza la primit la Cluj, si a devenit efectiv,valabil la scurt timp  dupa moartea sa)P.S. Recent am recitit lucrarea CUI BONO? THOUGHTS ABOUT A “RECONSIDERATION” OF THE TĂRTĂRIA TABLETS ATTILA LÁSZLÓ* in urma careia iau mai serios posibilitatea ca tablitele sa fie autentice (mai putin varsta lor)                                                             Telegdi studied in the collegiate school of Várad (present-day Oradea Mare, Romania). He was referred to as cantor of the cathedral chapter by a document in 1295. He attended an Italian universitas – presumably the University of Padua – between 1296 and 1299, obtaining the degree of decretorum doctor, which indicated his competence in canon law.


November 7, 2018

Atentie!                                                                                                                                                             Aceasta postare nu este o o descifrare sau citire a unui presupus continut scris real. Avand in vedere ca semnele nu apartin unui unic sistem de scris ci mai multora, pagina are un caracter pur didactic. Are rolul de a incerca si testa diferite scrieri in idea ca pe tablite s-ar fi folosit unul din ele. Semnele de pe tablite apartin mai multor sisteme de scrisi dintr-larg interval de timp si care au folosite in diferite arii geografice. In niciuna din incercari semnele nu s-au incadrat intr-un singur tip de scriere, totdeauna au ramas semne care au provenit din alte scrieri (sau din necunoscut). Cele mai multe semne provin din cele sumeriene proto-cuneiforme.Apoi privind asemanarea, in ordine descrescatoare este aceea cu semnele Linear A/B si cele Anatoliene. Semnele din jumatatea superioara a tablitei rotunde par a proveni din scrierea arhaica greceasca.Cel mai degraba aceasta “adunatura” de semne pare a fi rodul imaginatiei bogate a cuiva.Dupa cum au constatat A.Falkenstein si A.A.Vaiman, (aceasta fiind si parerea mea ferma) autorul nu a fost un scrib, avea doar vagi notiuni privind scrisul in general si nu se stie ce a urmarit. Exista multe elemente de neconcordanta precum si altele care scot tablitele din tiparele si normele uzuale ale  logicii, scrisului si intentiilor oneste.

  ============                                                                                                       FINALIZAREA CERCETARII TABLITELOR DE LA TARTARIA sau

Motto: “ Voi lua acum în considerare şi voi dezbate câteva mituri referitoare la aceste artefacte mitice..” …(Marco Merlini)
(TARTARIA TABLETS – Prehistory knowledge…/tartaria_tablets_02.htm )



Aceste tablite nu numai aparent ci si in realitate parca ar avea de spus o poveste si chiar au o poveste a lor proprie . Pana la urma au devenit un mit.
Povestea rezulta pe de o parte prin aspectul descriptiv-pictografic, (adica pictograme+semne) si pe de alta parte (de asteptat) prin mesajul pe care il ascund.
Mesaj inca necunoscut.
Datorita a numai doua elemente au devenit celebre, “de poveste” si incaodata mitice..
Adica separat s-a creat un gen de mit in jurul lor.
Deci avem un mit dublu, cel arhaic,necunoscut legat de un presupus mesaj, intretesut cu cel modern ulterior asociat lor.
Doua lucruri au contribuit la acest “dublu”:
presupusa varsta dar mai ales ipoteza de a fi cel mai vechi scris din lume, si
-larga, aproape excesiva mediatizare unde omul modern inca avid de mister a folosit mijloacele media moderne,respectiv retelele sociale.
Se pare ca la primul aspect (presupus a fi d.p.d.v. al scrisului extrem de vechi au contribuit si multi cercetatori, in situatia in care se pare ca in realitate nu numai ca nu sant cele mai vechi din lume dar nici macar atat de vechi cat au apreciat initial multi oameni de stiinta (limita maxima de vechime fiind atribuita la 6.200-4.500 B.C.!)          Prin aportul (altfel bine intentionat) al multor cercetatori romani, in frunte cu cercetatorul italian Marco Merlini, (toti acestia stiind foarte bine ca nu exista martori pentru momentul gasirii tablitelor, in plus nu se stie nici unde era absolut exact fiecare obiect si ca nici varsta tablitelor nu se mai poate determina) au contribuit la umflarea mitului, acesta ajungand la proportii biblice.Acusi un fel de mica Troia sau Atlantida.    La egalitate cu piatra de la Roseta, Egipt.                                                                                      In schimb Prof. Iuliu Adrian PAUL a exprimat o pozitie extrem de realista si chiar critica.                                                                                                                                              Multi cercetatori din lume, dar si majoritatea populatiei stiu gresit acum, datorita lor, ca tablitele poarta un presupus cel mai vechi  scris din lume, tablite cu varsta determinata la 5-6.000 ani B.C.                                                                                                                        Aiurea, nici o varsta nu a fost determinata.                                                                                 Dl. Vlassa s-a comportat cel putin bizar in perioada aceea.Poate avea ceva pe constiinta (nu putem sti ce) sau poate nu. Poate doar nu voia sa fie deranjat de presa !?.

In aceasta ultima etapa, o sa folosesc un limbaj descriptiv, asa ca un gen de povestire. Aceasta pentru a fi accesibil si usor de inteles celei mai largi parti a populatiei. Voi da cititorului o imagine cuprinzatoare si o vedere de ansamblu, in care tablitele sant parte.Unde tablitele sant numai parte a unei imagini panoramice.


I.Cum a inceput demersul meu
II.Definitii proto-scriere/scriere
III.Tablou cronologic al evolutiei scrisului in lume si Europa
IV.Semnele civilizatiei Vinca-Turdas (Danubiana)
V.Circumstantele descoperirii tablitelor si varsta lor
VI.Observatiile si parerea mea legate de varsta tablitelor     VII.Particularitati tehnice ale tablitelor,inclusiv tip de scriere
VIII.Presupuneri privind scrisul, cuplate cu cele privind scribul/scriitorul
IX.Presupuneri privind rolul tablitelor
X.Modalitati de apropiere de un presupus scris
XI.Evolutia si stadiul actual al cercetarii scrierilor nedescifrate inca
XII.Stadiul actual in lume al cercetarii tablitelor de la Tartaria
XIII.Concluzii preliminare privind scrisul
XIV.Pregatirea si abilitatile minim necesare pentru cercetarea lor
XV.Cele mai notabile apropieri de o posibila interpretare ale altor cercetatori                                                                                                               XVI. Cele mai recente idei                                                            XVII.Bibliografie
I.Cum a inceput demersul meu

Acum cca 12 ani nu mai stiu cum am vazut pozele tablitelor de la tartaria si scria acolo “cel mei vechi scris din lume..nedescifrat”. Apoi am tastat “inceputul scrierii” etc. Si am vazut o droaie de semne folosite in lume. Prima impresie a fost de “deja vu” in sensul ca aveam senzatia ca o parte de acolo le-am vazut dincolo.Apoi au urmat acea perioada de 12 ani in care “vedeam” deja cuvinte in diferite limbi…..aiurea.problema s-a dovedit infinit mai grea devreme ce cei mai mari savanti ai lumii nu au reusit sa-i dea de hac.11 ani am batut pasul pe loc, folosind doar alfabete clasice grecesc,latin si mai apoi cele Anatoliene.
Cand am aflat de inceputul scrierii in lume respectiv scrierea proto-cuneiforma si a celei din Europa, cea Egeeana (hieroglific Cretana, minoana /Linear A si miceniana/ Linear B) parca au inceput sa se deschida niste porti, una dupa alta.
Apoi am gasit lucrarile D-lor Vallance, Jounger, Papakitsos& Kenanidis si ale multor altora (Vaiman, Kolev)
Astfel am ajuns sa realizez ca nivelul cunostintelor mele este cand sub-cand mai rar usor peste acela evidentiat in lucrarile dansilor. Am inceput sa le studiez si chiar sa fac observatii asupra lor. In tot acest timp am avut ca referinta suprema studiile arheologilor romani, lzarovici, Sabin Luca, Iuliu Paul, si ale cercetatorului italian M.Merlini.

II.Definitii proto-scriere/scriere

Proto-scrierea este transmiterea unui mesaj prin semne numite pictograme si ideograme din care nu se pot deduce sunete sau cuvinte. Deci fara a se folosi vre-o limba anume.Proto-scrierea se face prin pictograme, ideograme/logograme iar intelesul dedus este neprecis.

Scrierea este transmiterea unui mesaj (utilizand semne grafice care reprezinta sunete ori silabe sau semne care reprezinta sunete aceste din urma semne fiind litere) deci prin/si care inregistreaza limba.

Proto-writing consists of visible marks communicating limited information.[2] Such systems emerged from earlier traditions of symbol systems in the early Neolithic, as early as the 7th millennium BCE. They used ideographic or early mnemonic symbols or both to represent a limited number of concepts, in contrast to true writing systems, which record the language of the writer.

III.Tablou cronologic al evolutiei scrisului in lume si Europa

Proto-scrierea a inceput sa fie initiata in mileniul VII B.C.E., dar exemple pregnante de proto-scriere (care preceda scrierea) au aparut simultan in Valea indusului,Egipt si Sumer incepand cu anul 3.500-3.200 B.C.
Scrierea propriu-zisa a aparut in mileniul III B.C. (2.500). Harta, din sit-ul

The transition from proto-writing to the earliest fully developed writing systems took place in the late 4th to early 3rd millennia BCE in the Fertile Crescent. The Kish tablet, dated to 3500 BCE, reflects the stage of “proto-cuneiform”, when what would become the cuneiform script of Sumer was still in the proto-writing stage.

Exemplu de proto-scriere (scris proto-cuneiform)/?3250 B.C.?:


Dar nu reiese: dat/primit?cine da si cine primeste ?, in ce scop ? ( pentru preoti, pentru mancat,datorie.imprumut,pentru templul zeitei Inana sau pentru a fi jertfa zeitei Inana ??)


3000 Early Bronze Age 2800-2600: EBA I (EM I at Debla)
2600-2200: EBA II (proto-urban [great house; centralized government])EM II: Vasilike;EH II: Lerna, Corridor House (“House of the Tiles”), destroyed by fire
2200-2100: EBA III: “Anatolian” pottery; potter’s wheel; Greeks?
1900 Middle Bronze Age Middle Helladic (mainland Greece)


small villages, intra-mural burials (Ayios Stephanos)
Middle Minoan (Crete)

1900-1800: MM IA: writing (Cretan Hieroglyphic)

1800-1700: MM IB-II: “Protopalaces”

1700-1600: MM III: Neopalatial Crete; Linear A

1600 Late Bronze Age Mainland


1600-1500: LH I, “Shaft Grave Period”


1600-1525: LM IA end, eruption of Santorini (ca. 1625; see below)

1525-1470: LM IB, destruction of almost all Cretan sites

1470-1400: LM II: Greek take-over of Crete (Final Palatial)
Mycenaean Empire

1400-1375: LB IIIA: early palaces (Menelaion [SP], Mycenae, Tiryns, Thebes, Pylos)

1375-1325: LB IIIB: destruction of Knossos in Crete (Post Palatial)

1325-1225: LB IIIC: destruction of all other Mycenaean centers

1200-1100 end of the Aegean Bronze Age all state-institutions collapse; Sea Peoples invade Egypt
1425 (1550) LM II Knossos survives
Palace style pottery
LH IIB Linear B


IV.Simbolurile civilizatiei Vinca-Turdas (Danubiana)

Pana acum nu a fost demonstrata existenta unei proto-scrieri (si nu exista un acord majoritar al cercetatorilor) cu atat mai putin pentru scriere (desi spun ei, in cazul tablitelor de la Tartaria alinierea semnelor evoca impresia unui text)

Din Iuliu Adrian PAUL

”Precum se ştie, acestea din urmă au fost socotite de specialişti fie „importuri”, fie imitaţii locale după tăbliţele mesopotamiene, atribuite aşa-numitei perioade „proto-literate” a culturii sumeriene, respectiv secvenţei cultural-cronologice Djemdet Nasr III b, a cărui datare a fost stabilită, de către autorul descoperirii (Vlassa 1963; p. 485-494), pe baza cronologiei scurte (Mesopotamiene), pe la 3000 î.Hr.”

The Vinča symbols (6th to 5th millennia BCE, present-day Serbia) are an evolution of simple symbols beginning in the 7th millennium BCE, gradually increasing in complexity throughout the 6th millennium and culminating in the Tărtăria tablets of c. 5300 BCE.[6] It has been argued that the alignment of the symbols evokes the impression of a “text”. The Dispilio Tablet of the late 6th millennium is similar. The hieroglyphic scripts of the Ancient Near East (Egyptian, Sumerian proto-Cuneiform and Cretan) seamlessly emerge from such symbol systems, so that it is difficult to say at what point precisely writing emerges from proto-writing. Adding to this difficulty is the fact that very little is known about the symbols’ meanings.

Dar, doresc să vă spun câteva lucruri despre Tărtăria, arhicunoscută prin tăbliţele cu,… unii spun, scriere, din nefericire nu-i chiar aşa, ci, cu transmiterea unor idei specifice celui care poartă tăbliţele, idei greu de împărtăşit altora, deci, nu este scriere, ci este o transmitere ritualică a unor idei. Această transmitere ţine cât trăiesc urmaşii şi, la un moment dat, se diluează şi se pierde conţinutul transmiterii în sine”.


Observatiile si parerea mea:

Neavand nici macar o minima calificare in domeniul arheologiei, initial am luat de bune toate cercetarile arheologilor precum si concluziile lor.

Pricepandu-ma cumva doar la lingvistica si sisteme de scriere, inca aproape de la inceput, dar si mai mult pe parcurs, din punct de vedere epigrafic, adica al scrisului nu se potrivea deloc varsta atribuita de cercetatori (6.200 B.C.!) , din analiza mea rezultand ca sant mai noi si in nici-un caz atat de vechi.Si mai rau ar putea fi deranjant de noi.

Din pacate, avand totusi la baza cele mai bune intentii, cercetatori de renume au creditat in mod nefondat dupa mine fara dovezi irefutabile, o varsta extrem de exagerata a tablitelor. Prin aceasta au adus un enorm deserviciu cercetarii stiintifice mondiale, nemaivorbind de absoluta deruta creata.

De un mare si extrem folos mi-a folosit urmatoarea lucrare, din care am scos cateva extrase:

Iuliu Adrian PAUL

“Astfel, E. Neustupny (E. Neustupny, 1968, p. 32-35), referindu-se la tăbliţele de la Tărtăria, subliniază că, după părerea sa, nu există decât două posibilităţi: ori datele C14 sunt fundamental greşite, ori tăbliţele nu aparţin contextului arheologic de care au fost legate de descoperitor, adică stratului Vinča-Turdaş de la Tărtăria. În argumentaţia sa, el înclină spre cea de-a doua posibilitate, bazată, printre altele, pe faptul că la Simpozionul Internaţional privind cultura Lengyel, ţinut la Nitra (Slovacia) în 1967, s-a precizat că, la nivelul tăbliţelor, s-a descoperit şi o ancoră de lut de tip caracteristic culturii Coţofeni şi bronzului egeean timpuriu.Dacă acest lucru este adevărat înseamnă că, datorită unei erori stratigrafice, tăbliţele au fost greşit atribuite celui mai de jos strat (Vinča) de la Tărtăria şi că ele aparţin de fapt ultimului nivel de locuire (Coţofeni) din această aşezare. În acest caz, decalajul dintre datarea pe baza metodelor clasice şi cele ale carbonului radioactiv, în ce priveşte datarea tăbliţelor, se micşorează simţitor, ajungându-se la o anumită convergenţă. Sprijinindu-şi argumentele pe datele radiocarbonului, Neustupny arată că în funcţie de rezultatele săpăturilor efectuate în ultimii ani în ariile unde culturile europene se întâlnesc cu cele egeene – rezultate care favorizează cronologia înaltă – apreciază că bronzul timpuriu egeean începe în jurul datei de 3100 î. Hr., faza târzie a culturii Baden, cam pe la 3000 î. Hr., iar bronzul timpuriu din Europa centrală curând după 2300 î. Hr. (E. Neustupny, 1968 a, p. 19-60). Deşi metoda radiocarbonului (C14) oferă date extrem de joase, pentru ultima fază a culturii Baden (2600-2300) se poate obţine, totuşi, o dată acordată cu cea a metodelor arheologice clasice (3000 î. Hr.) prin corectarea lor în funcţie de influenţa câmpului magnetic al pământului asupra producerii C14, element care nu fusese, până de curând, luat în considerare. Cultura Baden din Europa Centrală este contemporană însă cu cultura Coţofeni – reprezentată prin ultimul nivel de locuire de la Tărtăria – precum şi cu Djemdet-Nasr din Mesopotamia.Deci comparând datele obţinute pe baza C14 cu cele furnizate de analogiile stabilite pe baza semnelor de pe tăbliţe, completate cu informaţiile recente privind contextul arheologic al tăbliţelor (ne referim la ancora de lut găsită împreună cu tăbliţele, la Tărtăria) se ajunge la date absolute apropiate care se completează, am putea spune, reciproc. Consecinţa logică rezultată din coroborarea datelor amintite este că tăbliţele ar putea fi atribuite unui orizont cultural mai nou şi anume orizontului Coţofeni, deci eneoliticului târziu sau începutului epocii bronzului din Transilvania şi nu orizontului neolitic corespunzător fazei Vinča-Turdaş, datată pe baza C14 în mileniul V, pe la 4500 î. Hr. (Makkay, 1990, Pl.2). Prin urmare, acceptând datele radiocarbonului, ar rezulta că între orizontul Turdaş, căruia i-au fost atribuite, iniţial, tăbliţele şi cel Coţofeni se interpun, cronologic şi stratigrafic, mai multe secvenţe culturale distincte, dintre care unele reprezentate prin depuneri arheologice ce depăşesc, în unele situri, uneori, câţiva metri şi o istorie de circa 1000 de ani. Să fie oare aceasta soluţia definitivă a problemei? Dar ultimele cercetări privitoare la epoca eneolitică şi la perioada de trecere de la eneolitic la bronz (Sebastian Morinz şi P. Roman, 1968, p. 45- 125) bazându-se pe descoperirea unor materiale ce dovedesc influenţe provenite din faza Troia I (datată după ultimele cercetări pe la 2500 î. Hr.), demonstrează că datele fixate anterior pentru sfârşitul eneoliticului central şi sud-est european (2000-1900 î. Hr.) trebuie simţitor coborâte, în aşa fel încât începutul perioadei de tranziţie de la eneolitic la epoca bronzului să fie fixate pe la 2500 sau 2400 î. Hr. Acest lucru ar face ca datarea fazei A a culturii Cucuteni şi a culturii Gumelniţa, de pildă – cultură posterioară în bună parte culturii Vinča-Turdaş – să corespundă celor fixate pe baza metodei C14 (pe la 3100 sau chiar mai devreme). În acest caz datarea fazei de început a culturii Vinča (=Vinča A) cu ajutorul C14, pe la 4500 î. Hr., nu ar mai părea excesiv de joasă, iar atribuirea tăbliţelor acestui orizont cultural-cronologic ar fi exclusă………………………………………………..
Faţă de toate aceste discuţii, ipoteze contradictorii şi propuneri, N. Vlassa ar fi trebuit să răspundă, în primul rând, prin reluarea săpăturilor de la Tărtăria, fie şi doar sub forma unei verificări de control stratigrafic. Din păcate nu a făcut-o. Nu discutăm, aici şi acum, motivele. Consideraţii pe marginea acestei probleme au fost făcute, tangenţial, şi de E. Masson (Masson, 1984, p. 89-123). Cert este că N. Vlassa a preferat să răspundă printr-o serie de articole, în bună parte polemice (Vlassa, 1971, Apulum, IX, p. 21 sqq.) şi, îndeosebi, prin aducerea în discuţie (Vlassa, 1975, AMN, 12, p. 1-12) a unor noi descoperiri, şi de data aceasta, în cea mai mare parte întâmplătoare, aflate în „inepuizabila” colecţie Torma Zsofia.1 Asupra acestor din urmă vom reveni în paginile următoare. Oricum, întreaga problematică a rămas oarecum în suspensie, datorită dispariţiei premature a valorosului nostru coleg. În aceste condiţii am hotărât, împreună cu colegul Ioan Al. Aldea, să ne asumăm dificila sarcină de a efectua săpături de control stratigrafic în staţiunea de la Tărtăria, săpături ce s-au desfăşurat în vara anului 1989…………………………………….. Deocamdată, fie şi în treacăt, dorim să menţionăm , că, dată fiind importanţa şi complexitatea problemei, la cercetările din 1989 au fost invitaţi să participe toţi cercetătorii români interesaţi de problemă. Au participat, în etape diferite, Vl. Dumitrescu şi S. Marinescu-Bâlcu, până în faza finală, şi, parţial, Fl. Draşovean şi S. A. Luca.3

1 N. Vlassa, profund cunoscător al literaturii de specialitate din domeniu, a avut şansa şi poate ghinionul de a putea cunoaşte în amănunt Colecţia Torma Zsofia şi întreaga documentaţie asociată acesteia. Ori, în condiţiile săpăturilor sporadice de la noi, din Transilvania îndeosebi, aceasta reprezenta o adevărată „mină de aur”. De fapt, în concluziile articolului său din Neoliticul Transilvaniei din 1976, paginile 28-34, cu bibliografia aferentă, îndeosebi la p. 34, menţionează faptul că: „în rezolvarea acestei probleme… vor avea un cuvînt de spus şi cele peste 300 de semne de pe fragmentele ceramice turdăşene, aflate de multă vreme în colecţia Muzeului din Cluj, semne dintre care multe sînt identice cu cele de pe tăbliţele de la Tărtăria” 2 Dorim să subliniem faptul că, în condiţiile anului 1989, dotarea şantierului arheologic a fost mai mult decât precară. Ne lipseau până şi cele mai elementare mijloace, începând cu hârtia de împachetat şi sfoara, şpacluri, perii şi măturici. De aparatură şi ustensile mai speciale nici nu putea fi vorba şi nu atât din lipsa banilor, cât datorită lipsei fizice, pe piaţă, a unor materiale şi piese strict necesare. Singurul aparat foto de care dispuneam s-a defectat în primele zile, iar filmele procurate din comerţ s-au voalat. Acesta este motivul pentru care nu dispunem de imagini fotografice de la această săpătură. Nu mai pomenim de faptul că, din aproape 20 de probe C14, prelevate din diverse sectoare, nici una nu a fost primită în străinătate pentru analize, deoarece n-am putut procura pungile de plastic necesare, conform normativelor, fapt pentru care probele au fost declarate contaminate şi deci inutilizabile 3 Acestora li s-a adăugat, pentru câteva zile, cu intermitenţă, şi Horia Ciugudean, interesat însă, doar de nivelul superior cu depuneri târzii. În acest scop a solicitat efectuarea unei secţiuni-sondaj într-o zonă bănuită a fi locuită mai intens în etapa de tranziţie spre epoca bronzului. Secţiunea începută de d-sa a fost săpată doar până la adâncimea de 0,50m de la suprafaţa solului şi a rămas în acest stadiu până la încheierea lucrărilor din 1989
2Dacă o astfel de „îngropare” a unui „complex” de amploarea celui descris de N. Vlassa (Vlassa, 1963, p. 485-494; Vlassa, 1976, p. 161-197) a fost efectiv făcută, atunci elementele sale componente ar fi fost firesc să fi fost prezentate – şi păstrate (depozitate) – împreună, pentru a putea fi studiate ca un tot, inclusiv prin compararea lor cu alte vestigii similare descoperite anterior şi păstrate în colecţia Torma Zsofia spre pildă. Jurnalul meticulos ilustrat al Zsofiei Torma, împreună cu materialele adunate, a intrat în inventarul Muzeului din Cluj, sub forma unei colecţii. După ştiinţa noastră, la această „colecţie” au
avut acces, practic, două persoane. În primul rând, Márton Roska, care a studiat colecţia şi, pornind de la aceasta, a făcut verificarea stratigrafică de la Turdaş publicând apoi, cunoscutul Repertoriu (Roska, 1941). Apoi, spre sfârşitul anilor ’50, colecţia a fost studiată şi reorganizată de Nicolae Vlassa. Nu ştim cu ce s-a soldat această reorganizare şi dacă s-a întocmit o documentaţie aferentă. Nu ştim nici dacă, după dispariţia lui Vlassa, s-a mai ocupat cineva, sau a răspuns într-un fel, de această colecţie. Sunt doar câteva din multiplele întrebări care vor cere, în timp, răspunsuri documentate, care s-ar putea să nu fie străine de problema tăbliţelor. Asupra unora vom reveni în paginile următoare. Deocamdată aş remarca, în treacăt, faptul că mormântul de inhumaţie, găsit în complex, sau în asociere cu acesta, a fost identificat, după căutări asidue în depozitele muzeului clujean, abia în ultimii ani, de Gh. Lazarovici şi Marco Merlini. Acesta din urmă întocmeşte un amplu şi documentat studiu, aflat sub tipar.4 În această situaţie, argumente în favoarea cronologiei relative privind tăbliţele vor trebui căutate, în continuare, pe alte căi şi cu alte mijloace (stratigrafice, tipologico-stilistice, comparative etc., etc.). Dintr-un anumit punct de vedere, s-ar putea spune că am revenit la punctul iniţial, cel puţin în sensul că este puţin probabil să mai găsim argumente stratigrafice peremptorii fără a recurge la cercetările sistematice de anvergură, eventual exhaustive. Natura sitului de la Tărtăria, poziţia sa geografică în contextul carpato-dunărean şi complexitatea problematicii de ordin cultural-istoric pe care descoperirea tăbliţelor le-a generat, obligă la o astfel de abordare. Practicarea unor sondaje întâmplătoare, orientate după simple „intuiţii” sau deducţii, bazate pe coroborarea selectivă a datelor cunoscute şi a ipotezelor formulate până acum nu pot duce decât la înmulţirea ipotezelor şi a semnelor de întrebare asupra tăbliţelor şi aşa destul de abundente şi contradictorii………………………….
Din păcate, semnele de întrebare în loc să scadă s-au înmulţit. Simpla parcurgere a bibliografiei existente ilustrează în bună parte şi motivele. De pildă, nimeni nu poate înţelege cum s-a putut săpa, preleva, transporta şi depozita un astfel de complex fără a sesiza prezenţa tăbliţelor, indiferent de starea lor de conservare şi, poate, tocmai datorită acestei „stări”.5 – De ce conţinutul acestui complex a fost împărţit în locuri diferite de depozitare, fără legături între ele şi fără a fi făcute însemnările de rigoare? – De ce şi pe ce criterii unele piese şi/sau materiale au fost publicate de autor, selectiv, iar altele niciodată? – De ce, în ciuda publicării unei bune părţi a descoperirii, în special a tăbliţelor, la un an după scoaterea la iveală a complexului (1962) şi a interesului enorm pe care l-a suscitat conţinutul acesteia s-a impus un „secret” total, parcă menit să dea uitării tot ceea ce era mai puţin convenabil, de neînţeles sau greu de explicat? Oricum, asupra materialelor (descoperirilor) de la Tărtăria s-a instaurat un fel de embargo. După tăbliţe s-au făcut copii care au fost expuse în muzeu
5 Este, cred, momentul să subliniem faptul că, deşi conform unei înţelegeri prealabile, girată de profesorul K. Horedt, făceam parte amândoi din colectivul de cercetare de la Tărtăria şi Pianu de Jos, colectiv care, sub acelaşi gir, urma să confrunte, pe viu, rezultatele obţinute, inclusiv stratigrafia celor două staţiuni, săpăturile începute împreună au fost întrerupte din motive personale, de sănătate cred, după aproximativ zece zile. Am aşteptat, împreună cu studentul L. Attila, întoarcerea lui N. Vlassa după care, tot conform înţelegerii iniţiale am deschis şantierul de la Pianu, urmând ca la întoarcerea sa, N. Vlassa să mă contacteze pentru a hotărî procedura de urmat. Nu am mai primit nici o veste până în anul următor (1962) când am aflat despre descoperire şi publicarea acesteia în Dacia (N. Vlassa….). Ar mai fi de adăugat şi faptul că Laszló Attila, în prezent prof. univ. dr. în arheologie la Universitatea „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, deşi a participat, de la începutul până la sfârşitul săpăturilor din 1961, nu a văzut – după propriile sale mărturii, repetate – nici momentul descoperirii şi nici vreuna din piesele complexului. Tăbliţele le-a văzut pentru prima oară, la muzeu, după conservarea lor. Acesta pare a fi motivul care l-a determinat pe Laszlo Attila să se preocupe îndeaproape de cercetările Zsofiei Torma într-un amplu şi documentat studiu ce ar putea fi considerat, implicit, ca o invitaţie pentru reluarea studiului asupra activităţii şi a colecţiei Zsofiei Torma, în lumina noilor cercetări privind utilizarea şi semnificaţia semnelor grafice în preistorie (Laszlo Attila, 1991, p. 37-50).
şi puse la dispoziţia cercetătorilor. Tot cu titlu informativ suntem nevoiţi să menţionăm faptul că, în ciuda insistenţelor noastre repetate, nu am reuşit să vedem tăbliţele „în original” şi să le fotografiem decât în anul 1998, cu aprobarea specială a domnului director Ioan Pisso, fapt pentru care îi mulţumim călduros şi pe această cale. Cu acel prilej am putut constata, chiar şi cu ochiul liber, că tăbliţele par să fie confecţionate dintr-o „gresie” compactă şi nu conţin materiale organice. Perforaţia tăbliţelor a fost realizată cu ajutorul unui vârf ascuţit, probabil o unealtă de silex, iar operaţiunea a fost executată de pe ambele laturi, fapt pentru care orificiul nu este cilindric, ci conic, cu partea de la mijloc mai mică. O astfel de formă a orificiului nu se putea obţine decât în cazul în care tăbliţele erau compacte şi nu moi, pe cale de descompunere, fapt pentru care, potrivit afirmaţiei descoperitorului, ele au trebuit consolidate prin reardere, în laborator. Poziţia orificiului în cuprinsul tăbliţei este în aşa fel poziţionată încât să nu deranjeze inscripţia, ceea ce ne determină să credem că a fost practicat ulterior, în scopul folosirii tăbliţei ca amuletă. Despre sesizarea nepotrivirilor de ordin cronologic dintre tăbliţe şi contextul cultural-istoric la care acestea erau raportate, deocamdată atât. Putem adăuga, eventual, că sunt suficiente pentru a pune problema originalităţii acestora. Sunt şi în prezent mulţi specialişti care se îndoiesc – pe drept sau nu – că tăbliţele aparţin epocii şi contextului în care se pretinde că au fost găsite………………..
J.Makkay respinge încercările unor cercetători (Georgiev 1969: 8; Gimbutas 1973: 12; Renfrew 1969: 47, Pl. 5 XXXI; 1970: 199-211) de a interpreta posibilele semne „grafice” descoperite în sud-estul Europei ca dovezi ale invenţiei scrierii în acelaşi timp sau chiar înaintea începerii acestui proces în Mesopotamia, în condiţiile socio-istorice cunoscute, şi de unde s-au răspândit în regiunile adiacente. El le considera simple imitaţii (Makkay 1976: 13-31, Pl. 20-21), mai mult sau mai puţin reuşite, ale unor modele mesopotamiene. Makkay afirmă că acestea au fost făcute mai mult cu un scop magic, „fără nici o cunoaştere sau înţelegere reală a scrisului” (Makkay 1976: 24). Pentru a-şi susţine teza, el se bazează pe binecunoscuta tendinţă a populaţiilor „primitive” de a atribui anumite puteri protectoare semnelor grafice şi scrisului în general (Makkay 1976: 24). În esenţă, noi acceptăm părerea lui J. Makkay, în special când afirmaţiile acestuia se referă la „imitaţii” cum ar fi tăbliţele de la Tărtăria . Totuşi nu putem ignora larga răspândire (în Orientul Apropiat, dar şi în sud-estul Europei) a unor reprezentări magico-religioase cu caracter simbolic. Ulterior, mai ales în aria sud-orientală, acestea au fost transformate în pictograme cu sensuri grafice.
K. Conferinţele Bibliotecii ASTRA ales le-a amplificat, aceea a tăbliţelor de la Tărtăria, vor rămâne, încă o bună
Întrebările fundamentale legate, în bună parte, de descoperirea care le-a generat şi mai ales le-a amplificat, aceea a tăbliţelor de la Tărtăria, vor rămâne, încă o bună perioadă de timp, sub semnul întrebării şi în atenţia continuă a cercetătorilor. În esenţă, ele pot şi trebuie rezumate, lapidar, astfel:
Unde, când, cum şi în ce condiţii (context) au apărut tăbliţele? Răspunsul se află încă sub imperiul enigmei. Ne găsim în situaţia, paradoxală, să putem încerca mai degrabă formularea unor ipoteze privind natura şi semnificaţia lor cultural-istorică decât consideraţii cât de cât articulate privind originea lor. Deocamdată pare a fi singura cale care ar putea duce spre o încercare de lămurire, fie şi parţială, a problemei. Partea, aparent cea mai simplă, a provenienţei acestora este învăluită, încă, în mister. Sigur ne putem întreba şi de ce s-a ajuns în această situaţie. Nici răspunsul la această întrebare nu este atât de simplu pe cât ar putea părea la prima vedere. Încercarea de a „transforma” unele ipoteze de lucru, în „teze”, poate duce, uneori la tentaţia de a găsi explicaţii sau argumente „peremptorii” de natură să eludeze şi uneori chiar să elimine dovezile care deranjează soluţia sau ipoteza avansată la un moment dat. Uneori, cazuri izolate de acest fel, cum ar fi cel al tăbliţelor de la Tărtăria, pot genera o întreagă literatură, bazată pe criterii mai mult sau mai puţin obiective şi/ sau reale. Găsirea unui vinovat cu orice preţ, mergând până la acuzaţia de rea intenţie sau chiar falsuri intenţionate, ar părea cea mai la îndemână. Si o astfel de soluţie a fost, precum ştim, vehiculată. Dar ne-ar fi oare de folos? Nu ar putea fi şi aceasta o pistă falsă care ar putea duce la ocultarea şi vicierea soluţiei? Dar şi înlăturarea din start a unei astfel de posibilităţi ar fi poate la fel de păguboasă. În orice caz, nu ne-ar ajuta, în chip real, la clarificarea lucrurilor. Poate ar trebui să ne întrebăm dacă nu cumva de situaţia în care ne aflăm se fac vinovate doar unele persoane şi manierele „de lucru” folosite de acestea. Nu cumva viciul esenţial, nu numai în cazul în speţă, porneşte de la metodologia şi terminologia folosite în cercetarea arheologică în general şi a celei româneşti în special? În ce ne priveşte, am încercat, în lucrarea de faţă, să evidenţiem date,observaţii şi ipoteze mai puţin cunoscute şi/ sau uzitate, din varii motive, care ne-ar putea apropia, poate, de desluşirea acestei „enigme”. Fără intenţia de a acuza sau apăra pe cineva ci, doar de a ne apropia de înţelegerea unui fenomen care, într-un fel, prin omisiuni voite sau nu, ori prin lipsa reală, deocamdată, a unor date certe, verificabile, s-a transformat, în timp, într-un „mit al mitului”, aşa cum plastic şi inspirat l-a definit eseistul şi istoricul Marco Merlini (2006). Accentul pus pe aşa numita interpretare, cu orice preţ, a unor descoperiri eclatante, de tip „bombă”, ar putea duce, aparent, la rezolvarea definitivă a unor probleme „cheie” pentru o serie de chestiuni considerate majore pentru diverse epoci, ignorând, sau chiar ocolind o metodologie adecvată şi rigoarea care trebuie să înceapă cu săpăturile, organizarea, prelucrarea, întreţinerea şi valorificarea colecţiilor. Cu înlocuirea sau completarea unor mijloace, metode şi chiar a unei terminologii, pe cât de stufoasă, pe atât de aproximativă, cu altele, adecvate epocii pe care o traversăm. Inclusiv a informaticii, dar reale şi aplicate, nu formale. Din acest impas nu se poate ieşi decât printr-o reluare metodică a vechilor cercetări, asociate cu ample cercetări inter- şi multidisciplinare. Pe scară largă şi fără idei preconcepute, bazate pe paradigme forţate sau pe intuiţii şi „inspiraţii” mai mult ori mai puţin „geniale”. Este nevoie de perseverenţă şi răbdare. Implicit de asumarea riscului unor posibile greşeli, atât în ce priveste direcţiile de abordare, cât şi a metodologiei aplicate, a mijloacelor folosite, în egală măsură în cercetarea practic-aplicativă, de teren, cât şi în interpretarea şi valorificarea teoretică a rezultatelor. Atari situaţii şi problemele schiţate, doar, în treacăt de noi nu sunt specifice numai pentru arheologia românească, fapt pentru care în anii ’60-’70 s-au declanşat amplele discuţii din cadrul aşa numitei Noi Arheologii (New Archaeology). Din păcate problemele, teoretice şi practice, dezbătute nu au ajuns la o soluţie general acceptată. A rămas în sarcina arheologilor, aparţinând diverselor epoci şi domenii, să caute şi să găsească mijloacele şi metodele adecvate, în funcţie de specificul fiecărei epoci şi zone geografice.”



Observatiile si parerea mea:

a- Nu se stie precis, mai exact deloc, unde se aflau artefactele asociate tablitelor si nici tablitele in cadrul complexului ritualic.

b- Nu exista nici-o legatura directa intre oase si tablite si in consecinta nici intre varsta lor (oasele: 6.200 B.C., tablitele: exclus 6.200-4.500), varsta:” ?XX? B.C.”                                                                                  Consecinta nesuprapunerii varstei oaselor cu cea a tablitelor este la fel de grava in sensul ca poate nu exista “Doamna de la Tartaria” si nici o legatura directa a ei cu tablitele.

c- Datorita faptului ca avem pe cele trei tablite dupa mine trei tipuri de scriere, varsta celor 3 impreuna nu poate fi decat varsta celui mai “recent” tip de scris. Avand in vedere ca semnele de pe tablita rotunda (in special jumatatea superioara) pot reprezenta :

– silabe caz in care varsta poate fi 2.000-1000 BC sau

-litere, caz in care varsta poate fi chiar 800 B.C. -500 B.C. ( litere  arhaice grecesti sau alfabet epichoric cretan).

Rezulta ca, varsta ( cel putin cea estimata de mine): posibil, intre 2.500 – 500 B.C


Writing system Geographical area Time span[a]
Cretan Hieroglyphic Crete c. 2100 – 1700 BC
Linear A Aegean islands (KeaKytheraMelosThera), and Greek mainland (Laconia) c. 2500 – 1450 BC
Linear B Crete (Knossos), and mainland (PylosMycenaeThebesTiryns) c. 1450 – 1200 BC


Dar ar fi cu adevarat o reala si mare tragedie ca sa apartina erei noastre, daca cineva cunoscand evolutia scrisului a folosit semne apartinand principalelor etape evolutive ale scrisului.

VII.Particularitati tehnice ale tablitelor,inclusiv tip de scriere

Tablitele ar putea fi exemplul perfect de ilustrare al principalelor etape in evolutia scrisului. Poate asa ar exemplifica u profesor si arata elevilor aceste etape:

– etapa pur pictografica .Faza proto-cuneiforma.(tablita dreptunghiulara cu caprita)

-etapa ideografica-logografica Tot faza proto-cuneiforma (pictograme+logograme) dar o poate reprezenta si pe cea in care se foloseau silabograme (tablita dreptunghiulara cu gaura)

-etapa proto-cuneiforma sau cea in care se foloseau silabograme sau chiar faza alfabetica/litere (tablita rotunda).


Type of writing Meaning
Pictographic Elements are pictures, combined in graphically-interpretable patterns (e.g. temporal sequence or spatial relationship)
Ideographic Elements denote ideas, combined in a logical fashion
Logographic Elements denote words or morphemes, combined morphosyntactically
Syllabic Elements denote syllables, combined phonologically
Alphabetic Elements denote phonemes (more or less), combined phonologically

Type of writing Meaning
Pictographic Elements are pictures, combined in graphically-interpretable patterns (e.g. temporal sequence or spatial relationship)
Ideographic Elements denote ideas, combined in a logical fashion
Logographic Elements denote words or morphemes, combined morphosyntactically
Syllabic Elements denote syllables, combined phonologically
Alphabetic Elements denote phonemes (more or less), combined phonologically
the rebus principle is the use of existing symbols, such as pictograms, purely for their sounds regardless of their meaning, to represent new words.


Dupa toate aparentele, o persoana a vrut sa arate altcuiva sau altora care sant principiile care au stat si stau la baza scrisului.
In tablitele de scoala sumerienii nu procedau asa, puneau elevii sa scrie liste cu denumirile principalelor meserii sau ale produselor folosite (cereale, animale,etc).
Nu exista nici un alt precedent in lume inafara de timpurile moderne, unde cineva sa explice principiul rebus (folosirea pictogramei a ceva pentru ca mai apoi derivat din ea sa se genereze o noua notiune sau a-I asocia un sunet legat de acea pictograma initiala)
Cum aceste tablite constituie un gen de unicat/singleton, spre deosebire de ariile la fel dezvoltate cultural-econoic (dar care au ajuns la faza apropiata scrisului ,valea Indusului, scrierea proto-elamita, scrierile hieroglifica cretana, linear A, si chiar la scris, v. linear B unde exista zeci si sute de tablite), presupun ca in aria Vinca-Turdas nu se descoperise scrisul, nici macar proto-scrierea, asa incat nu exista alta alternativa decat o origine Orientala sau Egeeana.
Ori direct (scrise acolo) ori indirect (cineva le-a aratat celor de aici), ideea si principiul au fost aduse din sud-est (Orient, dar cu sanse mult-mult mai mari din aria Egeeana).Ele nu au fost scrise in Sumer si aduse de acolo intrucat scrisul nu este exact sumerian si nici nu vad cum ar fi putut fi aduse niste obiecte de lut care se pot sparge mai ales fiind purtate ca pandantiv de la o asemenea distanta. Scrisul nu este sumerian, exemple pe care le dau eu:exemple pe care le dau eu:


Semnul din stanga nu este tocmai semnul proto-cuneiform Ga2 Din

 Si nici cel Ku:

Ci poate fi semnul PA3 din scrierea linear A.Extras din:

Richard Vallance Janke | Minoan Linear A, Linear B, Knossos …


semn folosit mai apoi ca si litera Eta arhaica (archaic Eta,”Heta”) pronuntata initial”He” apoi mai tarziu “E”.Din “H-letter”:

Aceasta letera Eta/Heta nu provine din Linar A PA3 ci direct de la fenicieni (la origine din vechea scriere canaanita)

Din                                                                               “H, eighth letter of the alphabet. It corresponds to Semitic cheth and Greek eta (Η). It may derive from an early symbol for fence. In the early Greek alphabets a form with three horizontal bars and the simpler form H were both widely distributed. In Etruscan the prevailing form was similar to the early Greek form, and the same or a similar form occurs in very early Latin inscriptions………………………… In a few inscriptions from TheraNaxos, and several other localities the letter was used with syllabic value; that is, it included he, thus showing its old consonantal and its new vocalic value at the same time. Eventually, as a result of the spread of the Ionic alphabet, its use for the long vowel e or η became general throughout Greece, while its consonantal value as the aspirate h passed from the western Greek alphabets into the Etruscan alphabets and then into the Latin and other alphabets of ancient Italy.”

Din                                                                                           In dialects that still had the /h/ sound as part of their phonological systems, including early Athens, the same letter continued to be used in its consonantal function. Just like vocalic Eta, it could occur in a number of glyph variants in different local varieties of the alphabet, including one shaped like a square “8” similar to the original Phoenician (inline), but also a plain square (inline), a crossed square (inline), shapes with two horizontal (inlineinline) or with diagonal bars (Greek Eta diagonal.svgGreek Eta diagonal-2-bars.svg).[1][2]


Various spellings of the name “Hera” in ancient Greek. Left: original spelling, right: modern transcription. Red: consonantal “Heta”, blue: vocalic “Eta”.
1.) archaic non-Ionic
2.) classical Ionic
3.) intermediate (e.g. Delphi)
4.) intermediate (e.g. Tarentum)
5.) late antiquity.


The name Hippolytos inscribed on a Corinthian black-figure column-krater, ca. 575–550 BC, showing square-8-shaped consonantal Heta (inline), zigzag-shaped Iota (inline), archaic Pi (inline), and M-shaped San instead of Sigma.

During the classical era, more dialects adopted the new Ionian vocalic Eta (as Athens did around c. 400 BC). As many of these dialects nevertheless still also pronounced /h/, they faced the problem of distinguishing between their own old consonantal symbol and the new vocalic symbol. Some dialects, including classical Attic, simply omitted the marking of the /h/-sound. In others (for instance Rhodes), the same symbol was used in both functions.[3] Others distinguished between glyph variants, for instance in Delphi by using the closed square sign (inline) for /h/, and the open H for the vowel. “

SEMNUL H cu 3 bare oriz/inclinate


s-a raspandit in toata mediterana.Din Anatolia folosit in scrierea cariana ca E, pana la etruscani,alfabetul venetic, cel arhaic latin,etc. si pana in Iberia unde avea alte conotatii (pt.”Bu”)


Semnul din dreapta H-lui P/D?

Semnul P a fost folosit pentru R, dar semnul D a fost folosit de greci ba pentru R (Ionia), ba pentru D (Argos, Euboea) in diferite zone.


Imaginea din a lui Keyth Massey

Nu este semnul proto-cuneiform GAR din

care se citeste Ninda (cereale,paiine), cu toate ca primul D are o linie in el.

46072086_505746126580104_1702320058820198400_nMai repede semnul “SUR”



Imprimarea se facea cu aceste unelte obtinute din trestie:                                                    Din Cuneiform Writing Techniques


Jan 25, 2016 – The reed stylus. ON THE QUASI-SUMERIAN TABLETS FROM TARTARIA A.A.VAIMAN                                                                                                                                                                          “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.”
Adica pt. Tartaria s-a folosit numai cu un varf ascutit, semnele fiind zgariate si nu imprimate !
File:Greek alphabet variants.png   From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Parerea mea este ca sant sanse mari ca tablitele sa provina din aria Egeeana,mai precis de aici (Keos,Syros ?):

The Cycladic Civilization  Circa 3300 to 1100 BCE


Eu banuiesc ca in legatura cu comertul/migratii/extinderea surselor de metale, comercianti sau mestesugari in prelucrarea metalelor au adus aceste tablite.
Aceasta ipoteza corespunde cu cea a multor arheologi (Makkai & all)
the rebus principle is the use of existing symbols, such as pictograms, purely for their sounds regardless of their meaning, to represent new words.

IX.Presupuneri privind rolul tablitelor

Aici pe moment se complica lucrurile intrucat teoretic apar urmatoarele variante:
– rol economic, fiind prezente in ambele simboluri precum cel vegetal, simbolul tauras si eventual numere.
– rol pur ritualic
-rol didactic
-rol combinat>> exclus!

Daca rolul era economic atunci nu vad de ce apar simboluri religioase. Acest fapt de fapt este foarte posibil pentru cazul urmator, si anume daca este cazul unei jertfe/ofrande facute unor zeitati.

Daca erau tablite folosite de reprezentantul, preotul unei comunitati, ma asteptam ca acesta sa foloseasca un singur tip de scriere corespunzator epocii si locului in care traia si acest mod se exprima, sau spunea ce avea de spus.Pot aparea in acest caz elemente ca si cereale si animale (capre,taurasi) cu o anume cantitate sau intr-un anumit numar asociat cu zeitatile, zeitati prezente in special pe tablita dreptunghiulara cu gaura.. Rol magic, religios exprimat prin simbolurile religioase din tablita dreptunghiulara cu gaura iar ca mesaj verbal prin semnele prezente pe tablita rotunda.Rolul tablitei pictografice este acela de ajutor pentru interpretare.
– Pot avea un rol secundar sau principal didactic.Pentru ca altfel nu vad folosirea a doua feluri de limbaj, pictografic si simboluri/ideograme/icoane.

In sensul in care rolul ar fi didactic aceeasta varianta are o posibilitate extrema foarte neplacuta.Aceea de a avea de a face cu un artefact destu de sau foarte nou, acesta putand fi privit si ca un fals/dubios.
Fals si dubios nu datorita faptului ca nu le-ar fi scris cineva in trecut, ci in raport cu faptul ca nu mai au nici pe departe vechimea estimata si marile asteptari ne-ar indrepta spre un gen de “fass”.

X.Modalitati de apropiere de un presupus scris

Nu stiu cum sa incep…am incercat sa depistez in ce sistem de scriere regasesc cele mai multe di semne.In ordine descrescatoare le-am gasit in scrierile
– sumeriana (proto-cuneiforma)
-Linear A,B
Important este faptul ca am fost capabil si am reusit sa realizez apropieri/teste/tentative valabile de citire relativ usor si fluent folosind, ( aici vad ca ma repet):

– Biblioteca de semne sumeriene proto-cuneiforme

– Silabarele presupuse pentru scriere hieroglifica cretan si aceea a scrierii minoane linear A (nedescifrate) precum si acelea a scrierii linear B (descifrata/Ventris)

Iar mai apoi am folosit pentru tentativele de citire a tablitei rotunde scrierile arhaica greaca si eteo-cretana.

Desi aveam majoritatea semnelor in scrierile Anatoliene, (fiind focalizat in special asupra celei cariene), datorita diversitatii alfabetelor folosite in diferite arii (Egipt, Anatolia) si datorita limbii foarte putin cunoscute, nu am avansat mai deloc in aceasta directie.

Este foarte important ca reusind asta, am realizat ca exista un fel de legatura intre simbolurile sacre folosite in Orient (Sumer) si aria Egeeana (Creta)

Este vorba de simbolul vegetal sumerian SE si echivalentul din Linear A,B semnul Te ambelefolosite pentru cereale. Apoi semnul sumerian Ararma pentru capra/vitel si cel din linear A, Mu iar in linear B, Ma pentru vitel.
Apoi semnul sumerian Sa pentru uscare iar in linear A,B poate reprezentqa candela.
Semnul complex sumerian pentru templul soarelui/simbolul orasului Larsa iar in Linear A,B probabil semnul zeitei ceresti A-sa-sa-ra.
Mai avem semnul sumerian Ku pentru argint,pur,; in linear A,B reprezinta silaba Pa3.
Semnul sumerian Pa are echivalent,culmea in semnul din Linear A,B tot Pa.
Exemplele pot continua, dar cel mai bine le veti putea vedea toate in postarile incercarilor de citire.
Mi-au fost de mare folos si am avut un gen de confirmare in studiile cercetatorilor E.Papakitsos si I.Kenanidis in care se evidentiaza ca influenta sumeriana s-ar fi exercitat direct de catre sumerieni, pornind de la semnele proto-cuneiforme, intrucat (afirma dansii) primii colonizatori ai insulei cret au fost sumerieni.
Deasemenea ei sustin ca exista un fillum al scrierii proto-lineare Egeene (deci si cretane) pornind de la semnele proto-cuneiforme sumeriene.
Inca si mai mult, limba si scrierea eteo-cretana au la origine limba si scrierea sumeriana Am facut cate un studiu critic asupra fiecareia din urmatoarele lucrari:
-Legatura si presupusa origine a scrierii proto-lineare cretane din cea proto-cuneiforma sumeriana /E.Papakitsos & I.Kenanidis
-Citirea “sumeriana” a tablitelor R.Kolev
-citirea “sumeriana “ A.A.Vaiman ,
in blogurile mele: Tartaria si

XI.Evolutia si stadiul actual al cercetarii scrierilor nedescifrate inca

Nota.Nu voi face referire la nici o limba care nu ar avea legatura cu civilizatiile vechi din Europa, cum ar fi scrierea Rongo-Rongo.

-scrierea de pe valea Indusului.Progrese dar nedescifrata.

-scrierea proto-Elamita.Progrese, aproape descifrata

-scrierile hieroglifica cretana ,Linear A si cea Eteo-Cretana.Progrese, Nedescifrate.Obstacolul major nu este constituit de semne ci de limba, deocamdata necunoscuta.Nedescifrate.

XII. Stadiul actual in lume al cercetarii tablitelor de la Tartaria

Exista interpretarile sumeriene ale tablitelor de la Tartaria ale D-lor Rumen Kolev(Bg.) si A,A,Vaiman(Ru). Prezinta unele lipsuri,inadvertente si greseli neintentionate (necunoastere,graba?).Interpretate corect in proportii variabile 60-80%.Am completat ,corectat si exprimat observatii pentru fiecare lucrare.
Parerea mea este ca NU SANT TABLITE SUMERIENE AUTENTICE.NU ESTE SCRIS SUMERIAN 100%.Par a fi mai degraba de mare inspiratie sumeriana! (Bine zice A.A.Vaiman in titlul sau “Asupra tablitelor quasi-sumeriene de la Tartaria”).
El enumera un numar de cca 6 observatii conform carora tablitele nu respect modul de lucru si organizare sumerian.
Iar eu adaug:Nici tehnica, sumerienii foloseau exclusiv si inca de la inceput partea retezata a cuiului/cuneus cu care inscriptionau cifrele !

( Acestea sant cele mai notabile.Mai exista multe altele care fac interpretari fanteziste:
-ca tribul avea zeitatea Saue si si-au omorat conducatorul in al 40-lea an de domnie al lui
-apropiere de scrierea linear B (I-ye-re-ya,etc)
-folosind terminologia Vedica
-ca tablite numerice
-reprezentare a unor constelatii
Ma abtin sa spun ceva despre ele.

XIII.Concluzii preliminare privind scrisul

Faptul ca tablita dreptunghiulare are aproape toate semnele in casete separate denota ca nu este vorba de cuvinte formate prin semne aferente unor foneme ci de logograme (ideograme care reprezinta un cuvant).

Desi se apropie extrem de mult de scrierea sumeriana (Uruk tarziu, scriere proto-cuneiforma) dupa mine dar si cf.obs. A.A.Vaiman nu se incadreaza complet in scrierea sumeriana.Bulgarul Rumen Kolev este tot cam pe acolo, desi asirolog Dl.Vaiman il depaseste intrucat are lucrari privind semnele proto-cuneiforme
Dar tablitele se pot apropia in mare atat de scrierea sumeriana cat si de cele minoana (linearA) si miceniana (LinearB) prin simbolurile religioase (cumva comune?) prezente (icoane) si care teoretic si practic nu necesita o limba anume pentru a fi interpretate.

Simbolurile pentru :
Sumerian “templul soarelui”<> Lin.A,B zeita Asasara,
cereale sum.Se<> lin.A,B “te”(sitos,cereale),
sumeria vitel=zeitate solara<>zeita Ma,
sum.Zag Linear A, “Labrys”
sum.Sa”a usca”<>linA,B “altar”?, ar fi putut fi suficiente pentru ritualuri.

Se pare ca scribul nu stapanea decat in mica masura scrisul.
Este posibila si urmatoarea situatie:
Scribul foloseste simboluri vechi cu inteles de-abea tinut minte aproximativ, si sa contina scris propriu-zis (ex. De tip arhaic grec DOAR IN JUMATATEA SUPERIOARA A TABLITEI ROTUNDE!
Exemplu de acest gen in care este oferit un sprijin pentru citire:

Tablita pictografica: zeitate-spirit, ied, cereale,

In tablita dreptunghiulara cu gaura avem simbolurile: zeitate(X-ul acela complicat), animal,ied (cel cu coarne-urechi),cereale (acel spic)

Pe tablita rotunda in jumat, de sus putem avea in stanga: “HP”:HeRo:”domn”

sau “hed,ed,ede” “mananca/ied”in stanga si in dreapta:

cereale (semnul +++++ “Se,Su,Te”), iar prin semnele DDoo sau DDou “DDiu,Dziu/”zeu” sau Didou,Dedou:”da!”

Citite toate impreuna: HeRo Didu; “Doamne da !” sau
Ede didou: “da iedu”/ “mananc da !”

Prin prezenta simbolurilor religioase cereale=paiine, a taurului solar, zeu, labrys,puteau fi folosite, chiar prin intelegerea lor partiala ca purtand semne cu o mare putere asupra influentarii zeitatilor, dar si asupra participantilor la ritual.

XIV.Pregatirea si abilitatile minim necesare pentru cercetarea unor inscriptii (in particular a unora gen Tartaria presupus a fi foarte vechi)

-cunoasterea unor cuvinte de baza in limbi vechi (sanscrita,sumeriana,minoana-miceniana), si celor care constituie radacinile limbii proto- Indo-Europene (in total cca 20-50.000?)
-cunoasterea si recunoastere unor semne din libraria semnelor proto-cuneiforme si a silabogramelor din Linear A/B.

XV.Cele mai notabile apropieri de o posibila interpretare corecta ale altor cercetatori

1.A.A.Vaiman (A realizat ca si mine ca nu se incadreaza complet in scrierea sumeriana).

2.Bulgarul Rumen Kolev este tot cam pe acolo, desi are specialitatea asirologie Dl.Vaiman il depaseste intrucat are lucrari privind semnele proto-cuneiforme.
Este primul care a propus o interpretare foarte originala a semnelor DDoc ca reprezentand fazele lunii.
3.Marco Merlini.In afara de a-l seconda pe Dl.R.Kolev in interpretarea semnelor DDoc:”fazele lunii” nu are abilitati atat de inalte in a recunoaste semnele care au fost folosite frecvent in trecut in alte arii culturale (Sumer, Creta)

Mi-a trecut prin cap ideea absolut traznita ca tablitele ar fi putut constitui un exercitiu al D-nei Zsofia Torma sau altcuiva sau un cadou primit de la tatal sau sau de la altcineva (de la Univ. Din Viena sau Germania ?) cu ocazia primirii titlului de doctor in stiinte


D.D. (Divinitatis Doctor), “Teacher of Divinity”: [D.D. – Doctores (“Doctors”) D.D. – Donum dedit; Dedicavit (“Gave”, “dedicated”) D.D. – Doctor Divinitatis (“Doctor of Divinity” – i.e. Theology)Ad fontes: Ressources / Abkürzungen / Cappelli online › down › ab…
For each image of an abbreviation, you can view an image of the corresponding page in Cappelli …. 92, ddoc, decretorum doctor, Latin
HeRa Decretorum Doctor
“Lady decree teacher” !??


1..Vedeti Dumneavoatra, acel semn gen H, provine din alfabetul vechi canaanit si folosit mai apoi de fenicieni (litera chet,het pronuntat Kha, ch ca in Koch) si in scrierea veche ebraica.

Se zice ca grecii l-au luat de la fenicieni.Este adevarat ca semnul a mai fost folosit inainte in scrierile Libear A si Linear B ca reprezentand consoana PA3.

Interesant ca in final nu a ajuns in alfabetul grecesc din silabarele A,B ci, zic cercetatorii, ca provine direct de la fenicieni (foinica gramata/litere feniciene)

Tot interesant este faptul ca grecii l-au folosit mai mult in forma “boxed eta”/cu contur inchis “cutie” (ca 1 mai jos) pentru sunetul H, si mai apoi in mod generalizat pentru E.

In schimb a difuzat in forma deschisa cu 3 bare “orizontale” (forma 2, de mai sus) in intreaga arie Mediterana (in vechiul alfabet latin, la etruscani, alfabetul venetic, in cele italice, ca reprezentand litera si sunetul H. (A ajuns pana in Iberia unde avea alte acceptiuni fonetice.Mai rar a ajuns in Anatolia ca “E”).

De aici eu deduc, datorita prezentei acelei forme particulare, ca reprezinta litera H/heta mai repede decat E (eta).Odata pentru ca daca provine din aria Egeeana (Atica?) pronuntia H este mai veche si in al 2-lea rand daca nu provine de atunci si acolo, am impresia ca fatorita faptului ca nu este forma inchisa, ca provine din difuzia alfabetul arhaic grecesc in aria Mediterana, (tot ca H).

Eu m-am gandit si am incercat o interpretare conform scrierilor minoane (Linear A) si miceneene (Linear B), dar se pare ca nu ar fi in acea scriere, cel putin semnele din jumatatea superioara a tablitei rotunde. Nu sant de acolo pentru ca in acele scrieri (1800=1000 B.C.) nu au folosit deloc semnul D. Acesta apare pentru prima oara in alfabetele locale grecesti ca reprezentand ba D intr-un loc ba R intr-altul.

2.Aceasta aparitie relativ tarzie (800-500 B.C.) a formei grafice D in scris ne blocheaza posibilitatea atribuirii unei varste foarte vechi, Dimpotriva, ar putea fi deranjant de noi, caz in care multa lume va fi deceptionata (printre care si eu).

Este foarte posibil ca numai jumatatea de sus a tablitei rotunde sa contina un mesaj scris explicit.Partea de jos stanga ar putea cumva doar in extrem sa contina litere (Ex. Q,CC si Z) dar partea din dreapta jos in mod clar contine simboluri religioase>> Un altar in stanga (dupa cu si multi altii au exprimat aceasta parere)


iar in dreapta simbolul unei zeitati astrale feminine.


4.Asa, tablitele inafara faptului ca ar contine simboluri sacre (taur, labrys,etc.) ar putea fi destul de noi.

Nu stiu exact care a fost componenta populatiilor Vechii  Europe (Pelasgii) Cum s-au mixat si cum au interactionat (grecii, macedonenii,ilirii>albanezii?).

Apropos de albanezi, nu stiu cum se face ca limba albaneza este la baza arborelui Indo-European pe de o parte si pe de alta parte cica avem un trecut partial comun.Albanezii au folosit alfabetele altora, din care au derivat mai tarziu unul asemanator, dar propriu.

Balkan sprachbund – Wikipedia › wiki › Balka…
The Balkan sprachbund or Balkan language area is the ensemble of areal …. Also, Greek appears to be only peripheral to the Balkan language area, lacking some important features

Am avea in albaneza:                HD DDoc = HR  RRoc = here rrok

1,000 Most Common Albanian Words (with AUDIO) – › albanian › most…
A list of the most commonly spoken Albanian words. Translated into English. … Menu. Albanian Dictionary … Number, Albanian Word, in English …. 183, herë, time ….. 959, hera, time

What is the meaning of the Albanian word rrok? – WordHippo › what-is
English words for the Albanian word rrok. catch · grasp · grip · gripe · raw · snatch · grips · gripped · gripping

Rrok= “termen,sorok”

! Nu intamplator acum cca. 45 de ani,cercet. In orientalistica rusul Boris Perlov a dedus pe ruseste sorok=40 !

2.Asa ma gandesc ca se poate explica acoperirea jumatatii de sus:

Cand tablitele erau purtate la gat cu ajutorul unui snur, (fapt remarcat pentru prima data de Dl. Marco Merlini) :

– Jumatatea de sus, continand un scris (text), daca era vizibil teoretic era accesibil si altor contemporani cu scriitorul,nu se dorea a fi citit de oricine,si avand un caracter oarecum secret,nu era direct accesibil si astfel ascuns.

Acum ma gandesc care ar fi fost posibilele motive:

-un mesaj militar, eventual criptat !? Dar cine avea atata minte, ca avand ceva atat de important sa expuna  spargerii tablitele de lut si implicit pierderea mesajului !?

Apoi ma gandesc ca mesajul avea un caracter religios, sacru si oarecum personal.

Se pare ca si in alte parti anumite religii avea multe aspecte secrete, accesibile doar initiatilor.Poate si numele zeitatilor aveau un caracter secret, ca acela al lui Iehova care nu era voie sa fie pronuntat.dar care culmea a aparut scris in forma tetragrammaton (“4- litere”)IHWH.Poate ceva asemanator avem aici.Nu ma gandesc inca la o perioada mai tarzie, la faptul ca inceputul crestinismului nu a fost agreat, ba dimpotriva.Totusi exista o multitudine de religii, unele de inspiratie orientala cum ar fi Mitraismul.


Am putea avea Dboc sau mai exact Di b o c (vezi I-ul trasat in interior;nu a fost atent cand sa ridice cuiul si a lasat cativa mm la ridicare) > “zei,cer,divin”

(sau forma DDio > DDiou,DDiu

Ddio; criatore, Pataterno, Paternosto; Lord ~ Dommeneddio; thank ~ deorazia; who in God’s name is that? chi Ddi’ è chillo?; what in God’s name does he want …

Pasquale Scialò, ‎Francesca Seller, ‎Anthony R. DelDonna – 2015 – ‎       Furthermore, the word “dio” is pronounced [ddìo]; “dio” also doubles in Neapolitan. Please refer to Bruno Migliorini, Carlo Tagliavini, and Piero Fiorelli, …)

sicilian proverbs                            This page contains the complete list of Sicilian keywords from … arri archaic. precise meaning is lost in Sicilian antiquity. …… Ddiu n.m. God.

Din Father Sky in ancient Greek and Sanskrit – Zabaan Language Institute

  1. Genitive: Διος (Dios) in Greek and दिवः (divaḥ) in Sanskrit. The remaining cases are constructed on an alternative root div-. What is immediately evident is that the Greek form lacks the sound v. This is due to the fact that this sound was entirely lost in Greek after about 1000 BC. Where there is v in another language, there will always be a blank in Greek. Before this loss the Greek form must have been Divos.

Din The Ancient World | A Website for Learning and Discovery                                        cultural exchange which occurred between Greeks and Thracians along the …… and the legend, “DIVOS IVLIVS” which translates as “Divine Julius.

Imaginea din A PLACE OF BRIGHTNESS Keyth Massey

H P    D b o c

HeRo Dibos (citeste divos)

DOMN Zeu (Dumnezeu)

….de fapt Dumnezeu= DomnuZeu




Odyssey Belchevsky,

67 Rainier Sq. Toronto, Canada M1T 3A1

The form/name Zeus (Zevs) is phonetically and functionally connected to the massive root of everything associated with life, living, existence, propagating, etc. ………………..It is then not unreasonable topropose that God = life? Or, Supreme God Zeus = life on Earth, or simplyZeus = life? Table 2 examines the root-word associated with life in the Macedonian/Slavic language. (Please note the Macedonian character ? (in Latinic script ž) is pronounced in English as zh).


Table 2. Macedonian/Slavic words associated with life.

Macedonian read as English
?? zhi root word for life/living
??? zhiv (he is) alive
???? zhivi (he) lives
???? zhiti life
?????? zhiviti to live
?????a zhivota (your) life
????? zhitie life
???? zhivo (it is) alive
????? zhivos life, living
????? zhivio (a) living (man)
????? zhivets (a) living (thing)
????? zhivëë (to) live
?????[7] zhivil (to have) lived
?????? zhivëël have lived, to exist, existed

Since women are the divine and only entities that bear new life, then the above relationship reconfirms the meaning of life itself. Table 4 examines a group of Macedonian/Slavic words associated with this concept.

Table 4. Macedonian/Slavic words associated with the concept of divine and women.

Macedonian read as English
?????, ?????? DeevosDeeveena All nature, Wild, Wilderness
????? Divno Divine
????, ?????? Deva, Devitsa Young, Virgin
??????a, ??????? Devoyka, Devoyche Girl, Female
?????? Deevovee Gods of Nature

Divos, divina, means all living things ‘God created in the Natural world’ untouched by humans, in other words all that is divine. An unmarried virgin woman in Macedonian/Slavic is known as a deva, devitsa, devoyka. She is the divine creation that propagates human life.

Here ????? (zhivos) evolves into????? (divos) but still retains the meaning ‘all natural creation’. God is the only one responsible and capable of all natural creation. Thus God has given lifetoall living things.

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-sarrived at dveos and theos:

divos > dibos > qibos > qeios > qeos

The Macedonian/Slavic group of words is firmly supported by the Sanskrit words, e.g. Jiv = Zhiv = living = life. Also, according to the bible, Eve > Ive is the first woman/life creator and propagator on earth, zhive > ive > eve.

  1. Ref. [1], p. 131: “There are two coins, both preserved in Paris which are described by Monnet.” (Description de med antiques,vol.ii., p.280, Nos.179 and 185) with the legend ‘gortinion divos’. Voretzsch regards this as proof that this legend meant ‘God of the Gortynians’.” It is indicated here that the word Divos = God.                            P.S.                                                                                                                                        Recent am recitit lucrarea CUI BONO? THOUGHTS ABOUT A “RECONSIDERATION” OF THE TĂRTĂRIA TABLETS ATTILA LÁSZLÓ*  unde autorul /arhelog,Profesor Universitar in Iasi (prezent in sit in ziua descoperirii tablitelor) nu isi manifesta rezerve privind circumstantele descoperirii lor si nici privind autenticitatea lor)

Dumitrescu 1972 – V. Dumitrescu, Turdaş ‑ Mesopotamia, SCIV 23, 1972, 1, p. 93‑109.
Dumitrescu, Bolomey, Mogoşanu 1983 – V. Dumitrescu, A. Bolomey, F. Mogoşanu, Esquisse d’une préhistoire de la
Roumanie, Bucarest, 1983.
Falkenstein 1936 – A. Falkenstein, Archaische Texte aus Uruk. Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft
in Uruk‑Warka, Bd. II, Leipzig, 1936.
Falkenstein 1965 – A. Falkenstein, Zu den Tontafeln aus Tărtăria, Germania 43, 1965, p. 269‑273.
Filip 1966; 1998 – J. Filip (ed.), Enzyklopädisches Handbuch zur Ur‑ und Frühgeschichte Europas, Prag, 1, 1966; 3, 1998.
Gelb 1967 – I.J. Gelb, Comment upon C. Renfrew’s note, Nestor 112, April 1967, p. 488.
Haarmann 2008a – H. Haarmann, A comparative view of the Danube Script and other Ancient Writing Systems, in
J. Marler (ed.), The Danube Script: Neo‑Eneolithic Writing in Southeastern Europe. Exhibition Catalogue,
National Brukenthal Museum, Sibiu ‑ Institute of Archaeomythology, Sebastopol (USA), 2008, p. 11‑22.
Haarmann 2008b – H. Haarmann, The Danube Script and its Legacy: Literacy as a cultural Identifier in the Balcanic
‑ Aegean Convergence Zone, in J. Marler (ed.), The Danube Script: Neo‑Eneolithic Writing in Southeastern
Europe. Exhibition Catalogue, National Brukenthal Museum, Sibiu ‑ Institute of Archaeomythology, Sebastopol
(USA), 2008, p. 61‑76.
Harhoiu 1992 – R. Harhoiu, Otto Kurt Horedt, Dacia N.S. 36, 1992, p. 5‑11.Harmatta 1966 – J. Harmatta, Neolitkori irásbeliség Közép‑Európában? [Neolithic writing in Central Europe?], Antik
Tanulmányok 13, 1966, 2, p. 235‑236.
Hood 1967 – M.S.F. Hood, The Tartaria Tablets, Antiquity 41, 1967, 162, p. 99‑114.
Höckmann 1968 – O. Höckmann, Die menschengestaltige Figurplastik der südosteuropäischen Jungsteinzeit und
Steinkupferzeit, I‑II, Hildesheim, 1968.
Kramer 1962 – S.N. Kramer, Istoria începe la Sumer, Bucureşti, 1962 [= History begins at Sumer, London‑New York
László 2009 – A. László, Some aspects of the Tărtăria issue, in J. Marler (ed.), Proceedings “Signs and symbols from
Danube Neolithic and Eneolithic”, International Symposium The Danube Script: Neo‑Eneolithic Writing in
Southeastern Europe, Bibliotheca Brukenthal 35, Sibiu, 2009, p. 57‑66.
László 2011 – A. László, Tartariáról, majd’ötven év után – On Tărtăria, fifty years later, in Sz. Horváth, M. Kiss,
M.H. Rauert (eds.), „…eleitől fogva”. Régész—tanár—ember. A 75 éves Makkay János köszöntése [Papers
presented to János Makkay on his 75th birthday], Pécs, 2011, p. 247‑264.
Lazarovici, Merlini 2005 – Gh. Lazarovici, M. Merlini, New archaeological data referring to Tărtăria tablets,
Documenta Praehistorica 32, 2005, p. 205‑219.
Lazarovici, Merlini 2008 – Gh. Lazarovici, M. Merlini, New informations and the role of the Tărtăria discoveries, in
J. Marler (ed.), The Danube Script: Neo‑Eneolithic Writing in Southeastern Europe. Exhibition Catalogue,
National Brukenthal Museum, Sibiu ‑ Institute of Archaeomythology, Sebastopol (USA), 2008, p. 39‑51.
Lazarovici, Lazarovici, Merlini 2011 – Gh. Lazarovici, C.‑M. Lazarovici, M. Merlini, Tărtăria and the sacred tablets,
Cluj‑Napoca, 2011.
Makkay 1967 – J. Makkay, Die in Tărtăria gefundenen piktographischen Tafeln und die Jüngere Steinzeit Südosteuropas,
MFMÉ 1966‑1967, p. 21‑24.
Makkay 1968 – J. Makkay, The Tărtăria tablets, Orientalia 37, 1968, 3, p. 272‑289.
Makkay 1969 – J. Makkay, The Late Neolithic Tordos group of signs, Alba Regia 10, 1969, p. 9‑49.
Makkay 1990 – J. Makkay, A tartariai leletek [The Tărtăria findings], Budapest, 1990.
Marler 2008 – J. Marler (ed.), The Danube Script: Neo‑Eneolithic Writing in Southeastern Europe. Exhibition
Catalogue, National Brukenthal Museum, Sibiu ‑ Institute of Archaeomythology, Sebastopol (USA), 2008.
Marler 2009 – J. Marler (ed.), Proceedings “Signs and symbols from Danube Neolithic and Eneolithic”, International
Symposium The Danube Script: Neo‑Eneolithic Writing in Southeastern Europe, Bibliotheca Brukenthal 35,
Sibiu, 2009.
Marler 2014 – J. Marler (ed.), Fifty Years of Tărtăria Excavations. Papers presented at the International Symposium
“50 Years of Tărtăria Excavations”, Coronini‑Pescari, Romania, 1‑5 September 2011, Institute of Archaeomythology,
Sebastopol (USA), Suceava, 2014.
Merlini 2009 – M. Merlini, An Inquiry into the Danubian Script, Bibliotheca Brukenthal 33, Sibiu, 2009.
Masson 1984 – E. Masson, L’ ‘écriture’ dans les civilisations danubiennes néolithique, Kadmos 32, 1984, 2, p. 89‑123.                                                                                                Milojčić 1965 – V. Milojčić, Die Tontafeln von Tărtăria und die absolute Chronologie des mitteleuropäischen
Neolithikums, Germania 43, 1965, p. 261‑268.
Neustupný 1968 – E. Neustupný, The Tărtăria tablets: a chronological issue, Antiquity 42, 1968, 165, p. 32‑35.
Qasim 2013 – E. Qasim, Die Tărtăria‑Täfelchen – eine Neubewertung, Das Altertum 58, 2013, p. 307‑318.
Quitta 1960 – H. Quitta, Zur Frage der ältesten Bandkeramik in Mitteleuropa, PZ 38, 1960, p. 1‑38, 153‑188.
Quitta 1967 – H. Quitta, Radiocarbondaten und die Chronologie des mittel‑ und südosteuropäischen Neolithikums,
Ausgrabungen und Funde 12, 1967, 3, p. 115‑125.
Reinecke 1899 – P. Reinecke, Tordos és Trója [Tordos and Troy], ArchÉrt 33, 1899, p. 115‑123.
Renfrew 1973 – C. Renfrew, Before Civilisation. The radiocarbon revolution and prehistoric Europe, London‑New
York, 1973.
Roska 1941 – M. Roska, A Torma Zsófia‑gyüjtemény az Erdélyi Nemzeti Múzeum Érem‑ és Régiségtárában – Die
Sammlung Zsófia von Torma in der Numismatisch‑Archaeologischen Abteilung des Siebenbürgischen
Nationalmuseums, Kolozsvár [Cluj], 1941.
Schmidt 1903 – H. Schmidt, Tordos, ZfE 35, 1903, 438‑469.
Seipel 2003 – W. Seipel (ed.), Der Turmbau zu Babel. Ursprung und Vielfalt von Sprache und Schrift (see especially
Band IIIA: Schrift), Graz, 2003.
Sinn 2002 – U. Sinn (ed.), Schrift, Sprache, Bild und Klang. Entwicklungsstufen der Schrift von der Antike bis in die

Reprezentarea unui lingou de tip keftiu pe o placă de centură din …