Archive for January, 2019

HEDE SE DIDOU !

January 15, 2019

 Imagini pentru tartaria tablets

Not probably, but sure, the people are wondering how the things comes that I not show an sure, unique readingAs I explained before, this would be unbelieveble hard, because:                                                                                                                                                   – There is not known for sure the writing system, nor the language                                      -It is true, that it seems that is closest to sumerian, followed by Aegean/Anatolian writings and corespondent languages.                                                                               Overall I did not encounter great dificulties for reading tha tablets using both sumerian and Aegean systems. But the upper half of the round tablet some-how cannot match or be, fully enclosed in that systems.                                                                                                      – Beside this, I cannot explaine myself how exactly the section supposed to be hidden and contain an esotheric message (upper half of the round tablet), happens to contain newest signs (e.g. archaic greek).                                                                                              Consequently, I came with the assumption :that’s why this portion was intentionaly covered, because is the only portion of the all tablets wich is containing an quite clear, readable, undersandable messageby the contemporaneous fellows of the scribe.

OTHERWISE, IF ONE OF YOU GIVE A BETTER SUPPOSITION/EXPLANATION, I WILL BE GLAD TO KNOW THAT ONE.

————————————————————————————————

BEFORE GREEK ALPHABET COME TO BE STABLE, “STANDARDISED”, there was some regional, (epichoric) variants in wich                                                                                     the sign D was for sound R in a place and for sound D in another !                                  From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Greek_alphabet

                                                                                                                   ! !  that’s why we do not know for sure what was intended to be written  ! !                                   ————————————————————————-                                                                       HD :hede

+++++ : Se

D -D -o –? =D D o o/u/c?, in fact has also an “i” inside first D=>DiDoo,DiDou,DiDos ?

Note: in greek, DIDOU=DIDOS=GIVE! (Voc.)

THIS one here THEE GIVE!” > THIS YOU GIVE !, or “GIVE YOU THIS !”

kind of acknowledgment, receipt, voucher for what?some measures of cereals, goats !?

https://biblehub.com/greek/3592.htm                                                                                       hode, héde, tode: this (referring to what is present)

this one here,  it refers to what precedes, to what follows: neuter  these (viz. the followingthings, as follows, thus, i

BEFORE GREEK ALPHABET COME TO BE STABLE,STANDARDISED, there was some regional (epichoric) variants in wich the sign D was for R in a place and for sound D in another !                                                                                                                                                  —————————————————————————————                                                         or: hed,EDE! (eat!) or                                                                                                                        HERA/HER(OS) SE DIDOU :”THIS/DEFEND  GIVE YOU ,:                                                                          “this/eat/ LORD/watch-over,protect, defend- give you

gr. HERA “protector,lady“, gr. hiera:”sacred objects”!

ἥρως – Wiktionary https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ἥρως

The word hero comes from the Greek ἥρως (hērōs), “hero” (literally “protector” or “defender”),[3] particularly one such as Heracles with divine ancestry or later given divine honors.[4] Before the decipherment of Linear B the original form of the word was assumed to be *ἥρωϝ-hērōw-, but the Mycenaean compound ti-ri-se-ro-e demonstrates the absence of -w-.

According to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, the Proto-Indo-European root is *sermeaning “to protect”. According to Eric Partridge in Origins, the Greek word Hērōs “is akin to” the Latin seruāre, meaning to safeguard. Partridge concludes, “The basic sense of both Hera and hero would therefore be ‘protector’.” R. S. P. Beekes rejects an Indo-European derivation and asserts that the word has a Pre-Greek origin.[5]

The Gentleman’s Magazine https://books.google.ro/books?id=tGI3AQAAMAAJ                 The ancient manor of Wanstead was granted by Edward VI. to Robert Lord Rich, … the Latin Herus, the Low German Heer, the High German Herr (Master, Lord). … the Homeric Heros is preserved in the German Herr: the Greek Mestor, another .

-ου
Alternative forms[edit]

5:42 GIVE DIDOU 1325 {V/PAM/2S} TO THO TW 3588 {T/DSM} WHO ASKS AITOUNTI 154 {V/PAP/DSM} THEE SE 4571 {PP/2AS} AND
KAI 2532 {CONJ} TURN AWAY FROM APOSTRAFHS 654 {V/2APS/2S} NOT MH 3361 {PRT/N} THO TON 3588 {T/ASM} WHO
WANTS QELONTA 2309 {V/PAP/ASM} TO BORROW DANEISASQAI 1155 {V/AMN} FROM APO 575 {PREP} THEE SOU 4675
{PP/2GS}

SO IN THIS HARSH CIRCUMSTANCES,                                                                                           WE CANNOT KNOW FOR SURE EVEN THE NATURE OF THE MESSAGE, AN ECONOMICAL TRANSACTION OR AN RELIGIOUS-RELATED ONE.

Sumerian influence on Aegeean writing

January 14, 2019

From Sumer,Indus Valley, in Anatolia, Cyprus,Crete,Sicily,Sardinia to North America (northern Pacific coast indian tribes), the metal ingost had all-over in ancient times (Bronze Age ),the same physical shape:                                                                            “OXHIDE”

From Who invented the oxhide ingot shape? Meluhha artisans. An archaemetallurgical journey along the Maritime Tin Route.                                                                               http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2017/04/who-invented-oxhide-ingot-shape-meluhha.html

                                                                           The large oxhide ingots were signified by ḍhālako a large metal ingot

From https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Oxhide_ingot.html

                                                                                                    Copper ingot from Zakros, Crete, displayed at the Heraklion Archaeological Museum.

1.IN THE FOLOWINGS, I WILL SHOW SOME SIMILIRATIES OF AEGEAN SIGNS WTH THOSE SUMERIAN-ONES; such relation was noticed also not so succesfully I expecte by Iannis Kenanidis and Evangelos Papakitsos.

2. Following the transmission of meaning is another matter. Early after proto-cuneiform phase the sumerian writing evolved as one sign do add other meanings that original pictographic-one. At the point that the original meaning was lost even by sumerians!    So, if signs were transmitted, one reasonable expect, that only the shape was some-how mantained, no talking that in another distant place (Aegean) to acquire another, different meaning. So, regarding the meanings I only notice some aspects, (in the limits of my understanding), not sustain an transmition of meaning.                                                        =======================================================

First Tartaria-sumerian Aegean triplet:

From http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html

1.<metal ingot?<Pr-cuneif, sign KU < 2.KU:”metal,silver,shiny” > 3.Aegean sign JA and PA3 

1.https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/signlists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html  Sign KU~a

sign Ga2;

INDUS SCRIPT , http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2013/04/bronze-age-glyphs-and-writing-in.html                                                                                                                               “Impressions 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.

From http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2016/04/indus-script-16-inscriptions-with.html

Seal stamp m-308 Mohenjo-daro (DK 11794) Hieroglyph: Three strokes connecting two linear strokes: dula ‘two’ Rebus:dul ‘cast metal’ PLUS kolmo ‘three’ Rebus: kolimi ‘smithy, forge’ Thus forge for cast metal

3. From http://www.kairatos.com.gr/linear1.htm See signs JA and PA.

.

Fromhttps://www.minoanatlantis.com/End_Minoan_Writing.php                                        See Linear A sign AB56:

———————————————————————-

http://www.oocities.org/proto-language/ProtoLanguage-Monosyllables.htm                   K?A                                                                                                                                            The Sumerian sign (Jaritz #458) depicts a ‘tubular basket’; a variant, #458a, tapers toward the top; both have top-covers; both presumably and read ga2 (among others). Another recorded reading for it is pisan, which means ‘basket’ but perhaps also ‘*shallow tray’.

An archaic variant form for Sumerian sign above (Jaritz #458), Jaritz #458a, looks very much as if it could be the ‘head’ without the hair and neck we see in Jaritz #15 under K?XA; and therefore might be a sign for ‘jaw’; but it also may be just another shape of ‘basket’. As mentioned below under K?XA, the most promising prospect for ‘jaw’ in Sumerian is ga14, a reading of Jaritz #15 that is currently without an assigned meaning. I believe the the idea of ‘jaw’ provided the prototype and nomenclature for a ‘shallow basket tray’ but there is no trace of this meaning (‘jaw’) for this Sumerian sign

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

Second Tartaria-Sumerian-Aegean triplet:

                                                     See in the lowest row, from L>to> R: 2-nd and last signs

1.sum.pr-cuneif sign ZAG < 2.sum.ZAG:”the shine of metals; boundary, border, district’, ” > 3.Aegean sign A,Labrys,?Labyrinthos?

  1. From https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/signlists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html                        Sign ZAG~a

and sign ZAG~c  sign GA’AR:

GA’AR= GAR                                                                                                                                       From https://cdli.ucla.edu/files/publications/cdlj2012_002.pdf                                                   The sign GAR was used, thus, in order to denote all cereal products counted bisexagesimally, that is, virtually all barley
product rations except beer.2. Akkadian called Sumerian – Sumerian Dictionary – Turkic World s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/…/SumerDictionaryEn.ht…                                          SUMERIAN DICTIONARY. Links … Common Sumerian words for magical purposes ….. Holy of Holies, BARAGGAL … Metals, ZAG (the shine of metals).

Sumerian Lexicon – IS MU https://is.muni.cz/el/1421/jaro2013/PAPVB_13/um/…/Halloran_version_3.pdf            (derives from zag, ‘boundary, border, district’, just as þúb relates to gùb). zeþ[SAL.ÁŠ.

3.

From https://sites.google.com/site/raghavg602/economic-life                                                     see Cretan hieroglyphic signs 042 and *175

From https://linearbknossosmycenae.com/tag/labrys/

So this shape could reflect:                                                                                                               the shine of metals > double-axe.labrys, but also

boundary,border,district> place of  the other underground sumerian’s Sun,NERGAL and at Aegeans, the place of Minotaur , in fact place of Sun-Bull-God (labyrinthos)

Proto-cuneiform sign for house, temple “AB” has the close sign: https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/signlists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nergal                                                                                      Nergal seems to be in part a solar deity, sometimes identified with Shamash, but only representative of a certain phase of the sun.

Minotaur – Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minotaur                                                     In Greek mythology, the Minotaur is a mythical creature portrayed in Classical times with the … In Crete, the Minotaur was known by the name Asterion, a name shared with Minos’ foster-father.   ………                                                                                                                Some modern mythologists regard the Minotaur as a solar personification and a Minoan adaptation of the Baal-Moloch of the Phoenicians.

He dwelt at the center of the Labyrinth

Asterion (/əˈstɪriən/GreekἈστερίων, gen.: Ἀστερίωνος, literally “starry“) or Asterius (/əˈstɪriəs/Ἀστέριος)

http://www.unmuseum.org/minot.htm                                                                                        However, they have found what looks like a labyrinth. The labyrinth wasn’t built in a cave below the palace, though. It was the palace.

labbyrinth, in fact was somebody’s house: “house,temple” =====================================

This is Mr. Kenanidis and Papakitsos aproach:

So Mr. Kenanidis and Papakitsos, no double-axe !, even the sign is like, see above “signify all barley product rations”                         ================================================================

Apropos of above sign 57 (Linear B LA32),                                                                                    (Only sumerian -Aegean:

sumerian GA2 <> Aegean JA Sumerian sign GA2~a3                                                                     from : https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/signlists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html

Two main remained unclarified issues regarding Tartaria tablets

January 11, 2019

11 jan.’19/Two main remained unclarified issues regarding Tartaria tablets

Later on, I realised that two fundamental issues regarding Tartaria tablets remained unclarified:

I.The suposition that the tablets are not (by far) so old, and could be made later than innitialy suposed.

I advanced before the hypothesis about an recent origin of the tablets. As a posibility in a time contemporaneous with the scientist Zsofia Torma, and maybe later. I will show that this hypothesis is not fesable, cause:                                                                                                 – Before 1900 the proto-writing field and research  was quite empty, thre were not research papers Even now-days the research it is in a continous progress (see proto-Elamite, Dahl, Englund).  There were very few ew schollars at the level of A.H.Sayce, in Zsofia Torma’s time.                                                                                                                      From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archibald_Sayce                                                                           “Archibald Henry Sayce (25 September 1845 – 4 February 1933), was a pioneer British Assyriologist and linguist, who held a chair as Professor of Assyriology at the University of Oxford from 1891 to 1919″     

Even A.Falkenstein (born after the death of Z.Torma) only later got a sumerian proto-cuneiform sign list, notice, without giving any corespondent meanings or interpretations to signs,

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Falkenstein                                                     “Adam Falkenstein (September 17, 1906 – October 15, 1966) was a German Assyriologist. Falkenstein studied Assyriology in Munich and Leipzig. He was involved primarily with cuneiform, particularly discoveries in Uruk, and with the Sumerians and their language. From 1930 onward, Falkenstein taught as a professor of Assyriology at the Göttingen University.”

The tablets are revealing complex aspects, I would say even “sofisticated”-ones wich are reflecting an relation between Near-East and Aegean cultures. This complexity is depassing the medium level, as even an now-days specialist, practically cannot easy show this  with a now-made written tablet as exemple.  So, the suposition that somebody contemporaneous had tried and made such a try is falling down. ”                                           ——————————————————————————-                                                              Beware, here I distance myself from the main schollar’s path, wich are talking only of       “A relation at some degree of Tartaria tablets signs with proto-sumerian writing”.

I stress that the scribe was not “their literate person”, but “ours”,meaning by this that was somebody settled in Danubian/Aegean area, even don’t bother if was an sumerian descendant or not, and totally disregarding how old would be the writing.

The aspect sized by no others, only by me, that the signs on Tartaria tablets are common to two great civilisations, Sumerian and Aegean and are icons of paramount cultural importance. The signs are only related to those sumerian-ones but pertain to whole European prehistory.                                                                                          This very aspect was not sized nor revendicated by somebody before me. The schollars limited only to notice the similarity with sumerian proto cuneiform writing and so forced to interpret the “writing” within these limits.   

Exemple of such papers:                                                                                                                     A Comparative Linguistic Study about the Sumerian Influence on the Creation of the Aegean Scripts Ioannis K. Kenanidis1, Evangelos C. Papakitsos*2                       file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/SJAHSS-31E332-346%20(1).pdf                                                     Additional Palaeographic Evidence for the Relationship of the Aegean Scripts to the Sumerian Pictography                                                                          file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/SJAHSS-33C734-737Additionalevidence.pdf                              In these papersmany exemples are not the best choosen-ones, not much convincing and regarding sumerian signs, there is not shown their sumerian name nor what signify or the meaning.  Only in the last mentioned paper there are scarce correct associations:  Linear B,sign”A”(labrys) with sumer.”double axe”, where sumerian sign is no double-axe, it is sum. sign ZAG, then sum.AMAR it is not correct associated.              Only in the last paper there are some few correct associated.Corect assoc. :Lin.B(LA32)”JA”, then sum.Se with Egeean Te….and that’s all.                                                 Of course because probably was not their goal, no reference to Tartaria tablet’s signs.

Eg., only some SIGNS COMPARED by me:

Sumerian           Aegean

GAR                    VOLUME UNIT       (Egypt, T,”loaf of bread” )                                                    SE                         TE                              Cereal,grain                                                                         AMAR                   MA                                                                                                                               Y                              Y                                                                                                                           KU                         PA3                                                                                                                             AB                     LABRYS                                                                                                                          PA                         PA                                                                                                                                 etc                        etc

                                       ——————————————————————————-

II. The suposition (otherwise corect) that the upper half of the round tablet is containing kind of willingly hidden, or esoteric message.

Yes, more than possible. But from wich period of time, and why to be hidden, especially the nature of the message !?

Here, the presence of one sign wich is not be found even in Aegean writings (nor in eteo-Cretan-ones) are pitty conducting us to the archaic greek writing.

It is about the well-known “D-letter” shaped sign. In the upper half of the round Tartaria tablet, only the Aegean signs Pa3(arch. Gr.Eta), sign “o” and some-how the sign “+++++” seem to existed before, and sign D appeared only in the first regional/epichoric archaic greek alphabets.                                                                                                                                This fact is pushing us away from an extremely old period, to the 800-300 years B.C. Now, what could be written there?                                                                                                     Note                                                                                                                                                         1.One don’t expect necessary an continous message as in a sentence, there could be isolated icons wich has independent meanings but close related to an single solid religious system of notions and values.                                                                                          2. I did not know before, there are even sentences wit only 2 words!                                          ———————————————————————————

Even before some years, I found that the oldest atestation in writing of the “HP” monogram, was found on some broken pot clay sherds, in some places, (probably at the origin from, or related to Samos), much more outside Greece, in the Levantine coast and Egypt.

You understand from “HP”,: “archaic eta-Rho”, where archaic eta was in the shape of “boxed-eta”, meaning closed contour, or with some earlier shape, “eta/heta a scala” meaning in the “ladder” shape.

Scholars are opinating that this sequence was abbreviation for                                     1.Hera                                                                                                                                                 2.Heros (Hero)                                                                                                                         3.proper name Heros. Same me saying.

Cause :                                                                                                                                                      – The oldest Aegean deity was at the origin Vinca mother-goddess followed by later minoan Asasara and Ida-mater,/Damater, and aftyerwards by Dione,                                     – Hera somehow is preceding Zeus,                                                                                                  – Complex nature of the Hera’s role and etymology,                                                                      I put on first place Hera, and only close-after an supposed Heros.           (remember that both Horus as Heros were kind of people saviors, Christ precursors)

From http://www.crystalinks.com/hera.html                                                                       ”Unlike some Greek gods, such as Zeus and Poseidon, Hera’s name is not analyzable as a Greek or Indo-European word. She therefore seems to be a survival of a pre-Greek “great goddess” figure – perhaps one of the powerful female divinities of the Minoan pantheon, or of some unidentified pre-Greek (“Pelasgian”) people.

From https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hera#Etimologie                                                                     ”Una dintre primele instanțe ale numelui zeiței apare pe tablele din Pylos, scrise în Linearul B,[1] un sistem de scriere care a fost găsit și pe datând încă din 1450 î.Hr.[2] folosit de civilizațiile miceniene până la colapsul acestora în secolul XII î.Hr. Aici apare ca Qo-wi-ja (Guōwiā „cea asemenea vacilor” un cunoscut epitet homeric).[1]

Numele Herei poate avea mai multe etimologii se exclud reciproc; o explicație leagă numele de ὥρα transliterat hōra, însemnând sezon, interpretându-l ca o vreme propice pentru căsătorie. Pe de altă parte, Platon consideră că e legat de ἐρατή transliterat eratē, adică „preiubit”, deoarece se spune că Zeus s-a căsătorit cu ea din dragoste, sau că numele zeiței este anagramă a aēr (ἀήρ, „aer“).[3] Plutarh susține a doua variantă sugerând că este un nume alegoric pentru poziția înălțată a acesteia.[4]

nonsense…

From https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E1%BC%AD%CF%81%CE%B1#Ancient_Greek   ”HERA EtymologyUncertain. Possibly a feminine form of ἥρως (hḗrōs) or related to ὥρα (hṓra).”

Not convinced! I am binding the Hera’s name out of “protectress”, also to: er,era:”EaRth” ,hiera:”holy” and hera “Lady” !!

From https://www.etymonline.com/word/hera                                                                               ”sister and wife of Zeus, the type of virtuous womanhood, from Greek Hēra, literally “protectress,” related to hērōs “hero,” originally “defender, protector” (see hero (n.1)).”

 

11Ian’19/Clarificarea a doua aspecte fundamentale privind Tablitele de la Tartaria

January 11, 2019

Ulterior am realizat ca urmatoarele aspecte necesita o revenire si clarificare:

I. Supozitia ca tablitele nu sant nici pe departe atat de vechi si au fost facute ulterior. 

Am avansat anterior ca ipoteza o origine relativ recenta a tablitelor. Cum ar fi in perioada de activitate a Zsofiei Torma si chiar ulterioara. In buna masura aceasta ipoteza nu se sustine, intrucat:                                                                                                                         – Inainte de 1900 domeniul scrierii proto-cuneiforme nu era aproape deloc cercetat.Foarte putini cercetatori de talia lui A.H.Sayce, contemporani cu Zsofia Torma erau in acea vreme.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archibald_Sayce                                                                           Archibald Henry Sayce (25 September 1845 – 4 February 1933), was a pioneer British Assyriologist and linguist, who held a chair as Professor of Assyriology at the University of Oxford from 1891 to 1919                                                                                   Chiar si Falkenstein (nascut dupa moartea Zsofiei T.) de-abea mai tarziu a scos lista semnelor proto-cuneiforme, nedand nici-unui semn vre-o interpretare.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Falkenstein                                                                 Adam Falkenstein (September 17, 1906 – October 15, 1966) was a German Assyriologist. Falkenstein studied Assyriology in Munich and Leipzig. He was involved primarily with cuneiform, particularly discoveries in Uruk, and with the Sumerians and their language. From 1930 onward, Falkenstein taught as a professor of Assyriology at the Göttingen University.

Tablitele prezinta aspecte complexe, as zice eu chiar “sofisticate” care reflecta o relatie intre culturile Orientale si cea Aegeeana. Aceasta complexitate depaseste nivelul mediu. ca atare nici macar un specialist in zilele noastre, nu ar putea sa reflecte ( a se citi sa imite) aceste legaturi. Deci supozitia ca cineva relativ contemporan ar fi facut un gen de incercare, cade.                                                                                                                              ————————————————————————————————————————————

ATENTIE

Un anume aspect  nu a fost sesizat de altii, ci numai de mine, si anume ca semnele de pe tablitele de la Tartaria sant comune a doua mari civilizatii, cea sumeriana si cea Egeeana, iar icoanele au fost de o importanta culturala covarsitoare in aambele civilizatii.

. Semnele doar au legatura cu cele sumeriene si de fapt apartin preistoriei Europei in general si celei Vinca si Egeene in particular. Aceasta observatie nu a fost revendicata de nimeni pana acum.                                                                                                                     Savantii s-au limitat in a face doar o legatura cu semnele sumeriene proto-cuneiforme si a le atribui interpretarea sumeriana !                                                          Deci fara ca sa depaseasca aceste limite.                                                                               Exemple de asemenea lucrari:                                                                                                         A Comparative Linguistic Study about the Sumerian Influence on the Creation of the Aegean Scripts Ioannis K. Kenanidis1, Evangelos C. Papakitsos*2 file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/SJAHSS-31E332-346%20(1).pdf                                                     Additional Palaeographic Evidence for the Relationship of the Aegean Scripts
to the Sumerian Pictography    file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/SJAHSS-33C734-737Additionalevidence.pdf                                                                                                               In aceastea, foarte multe exemple nu sant fericit gasite, nu sant convingatoare si nici prea concludente, iar in privinta semnelor sumeriene nu este data denumirea sumeriana si nici semnificatia lor.Doar in ultima lucrare sant cateva asocieri relativ corecte :    Linear B,”A”(labrys) cu sumer.”double axe” cand semnul sum. nu este nici-o dubla-secure, este semnul ZAG;C,apoi sum.AMAR nu este bine asociat. Corect asoc. :Lin.B(LA32)”JA”, apoi sum.Se cu Egeean Te….si cam atat. Bineinteles, posibil pentru ca nici nu si-au propus, ca nu apare nici-o ref. la tablitele de la Tartaria.                                                                     

Ex., doar cateva  SEMNE COMPARATE de mine:

Sumerian               Aegean

  GAR                    UNIT de VOLUM       (Egypt, T,”jimbla de paiine” )                                              SE                          TE                              Cereale-boabe,grau                                                          AMAR                    MA                                                                                                                               Y                              Y                                                                                                                              KU                           PA3                                                                                                                             AB                       LABRYS                                                                                                                        PA                         PA                                                                                                                                etc                        etc           =========================================================================        II. Supozitia (altfel corecta) ca jumatatea de sus a tablitei rotunde contine un “mesaj” intentionat ascuns.

Da, mai mult decat posibil.Dar din ce perioada, de ce ar fi fost ascuns, si mai ales de ce natura ar fi putut fi !?

Aici, prezenta unui semn care nu se regaseste nici macar in scrierile Egeene (nici macar scrierea eteo-Cretana nu poate intra in discutie) ne conduce din pacate spre perioada scrierii arhaice grecesti.                                                                                                                 Este vorba despre semnul “D”. In jumatatea de sus a tablitei rotunde doar semnele Egeean PA3 (arh. grec eta) si “o”au existat, in schimb semnul “D” nu a aparut decat doar in primele alfabete grecesti.

Acest fapt ne indeparteaza total de o presupusa perioada extrem de veche (3.500-3.000 B.C.) si ne indreapta direct spre perioada 800-300 B.C.                                                              Acuma ce ar putea fi scris acolo ?                                                                                                      ————————————————————————————–                                                 Atentie, aici ma indepartez de cursul acceptat al oamenilor de stiinta, care fac o directa legatura cu scrierea sumeriana.                                                                                   Eu zic ca autorul “scrierii” nu a fost “intelectualul lor” ci al nostru, adica din aria Egeana/Dunareana, aceasta independent de faptul  ca ar fi fost mai vechi sau mai nou.       Aspectul sesizat ca semnele sant comune unor mari civilizatii, Sumeriana si Egeeana nu a fost sesizat si nici revendicat de altcineva inaintea mea. Cercetatorii s-au limitat la o interpretare facand doar legatura cu civilizatia sumeriana.                                                ———————————————————————————————————                                Inca acum cativa ani, am gasit cea mai veche atestare a asociatiei de semne “HP” a fost gasita pe bucati de artefacte din lut in Grecia si poate mai multe in Orientul Apropiat si Egipt. Sa intelegeti prin “HP” archaic eta-rho. Adica arhaic eta sub forma “boxed/cutie” adica cu contur inchis sau forma “in scarita”.                                                                         Cercetatorii au avansat ipoteza ca arfi monograma sau prescrtarea pentru Hera sau Heros. La fel zic si eu. Avand in vedere ca se pare ca                                                                    – zeitatea Hera il precede cumva pe Zeus, si avand in vedere:                                                  -lunga perioada anterioara de venerare a unei zeite Pamant-Mama (Earth Goddess), dar si natura complexa a numelui Hera, eu dau intaietate lui Hera ,urmat indeaproape de un eventual Heros. (A se retine ca Heros a fost un gen de erou salvator precursor a lui Cristos)

Din http://www.crystalinks.com/hera.html                                                                             Unlike some Greek gods, such as Zeus and Poseidon, Hera’s name is not analyzable as a Greek or Indo-European word. She therefore seems to be a survival of a pre-Greek “great goddess” figure – perhaps one of the powerful female divinities of the Minoan pantheon, or of some unidentified pre-Greek (“Pelasgian”) people.

https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hera#Etimologie                                                                               Una dintre primele instanțe ale numelui zeiței apare pe tablele din Pylos, scrise în Linearul B,[1] un sistem de scriere care a fost găsit și pe datând încă din 1450 î.Hr.[2] folosit de civilizațiile miceniene până la colapsul acestora în secolul XII î.Hr. Aici apare ca Qo-wi-ja (Guōwiā „cea asemenea vacilor” un cunoscut epitet homeric).[1]

Numele Herei poate avea mai multe etimologii se exclud reciproc; o explicație leagă numele de ὥρα transliterat hōra, însemnând sezon, interpretându-l ca o vreme propice pentru căsătorie. Pe de altă parte, Platon consideră că e legat de ἐρατή transliterat eratē, adică „preiubit”, deoarece se spune că Zeus s-a căsătorit cu ea din dragoste, sau că numele zeiței este anagramă a aēr (ἀήρ, „aer“).[3] Plutarh susține a doua variantă sugerând că este un nume alegoric pentru poziția înălțată a acesteia.[4]

aiurea…      https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E1%BC%AD%CF%81%CE%B1#Ancient_Greek   EtymologyUncertain. Possibly a feminine form of ἥρως (hḗrōs) or related to ὥρα (hṓra).[1][2]

varza! eu leg numele de Hera/er,era:”pamant” ,hiera:”sfanta” si hera “doamna” !!

https://www.etymonline.com/word/hera                                                                                          sister and wife of Zeus, the type of virtuous womanhood, from Greek Hēra, literally “protectress,” related to hērōs “hero,” originally “defender, protector” (see hero (n.1)).

Tartaria tablets signs compared or Tartaria tablets, sign by sign

January 8, 2019

OUT OF SOME OUTSTANDING INTERPRETATIONS THROUGH SUMERIAN (A.A.VAIMAN and RUMEN KOLEV),                                                                                                                          AFTER SOME YEARS OF RESEARCH, A CLEAR IMAGE IS EMERGING:                               MANY SUMERIAN PROTO-CUNEIFORM SIGNS HAS EQUIVALENTS IN SHAPE IN AEGEAN WRITINGS.                                                                                                                                           AS MR. RUMEN KOLEV  FIRST NOTICED AND MADE SUCH ATTEMPTS,                              I FOUND ALSO MUCH MORE SIMILARITIES AND CULTURAL RELATIONS, AS BEEING ABLE TO DEDUCE/EXTRACT AND SHOW MUCH MORE AND CLOSE  MEANINGS.                                                                                                                                          IT IS ABOUT OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE, COMMON IN AN EXTENDED AREA ICONS, WITH THE ORIGIN FAR BACK IN TIME. =================================================================

More or less, almost all the signs could be fount in exact shape or as a sqetch the sumerian proto-cuneiform sign lists. But some of them reflect the exact shape of the signs from later-time writings. Where the signs has the exact shape of a writing,I  marked with*.

Round tablet’s signs (R)

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSoHnmGyZZHx37HuCFCpYRgIJdQxE5vuc7vcNlb00JtKMccyZpjqA

No1. sign “+++++”   

All-three-have-symbols-inscribed-only-on-one-face.-Photo-Credit-640x480                                                                                                                       

No.2.1 sign :1-st “D”                                                                                                                      No.2.2: 2-nd “D”                                                                                                                             No.2.3, sign”o”                                                                                                                          No.2.4, sign”o/c”?                                                                                                                               No.3 sign: Downward-Right quarter,  on the right

  SEgrid                               

No.4, sign:Downward-right quarter,  on the left (red)                                                              cristian_luchian_tartaria_tablets   

No.5.sign “Z-like”lower sign                                 

 SWgrid                                                                                                                                      No.6/left sign “bow&arrow”                                                                                                      No.6/up, sign “>>”                                                                                                                             The-meaning-if-any-of-the-symbols-is-unknown.-Photo-Credit-640x480   

No.7, sign on the left, “H”-like                                                                           

No.8,sign,on right “P/D”-like

Squared tablet’s signs (Sq):

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTGmJn6uRzrDVyluR0qaLWHqYbn2UJsQbNcrjbnze7I27mP1riVZg

fig-202

Table in wich is showed every sign in wich writing was found in exact shape and most frequent: Table, from https://tied.verbix.com/project/script/asiam.html

asiam6

Note:”Anatolian, means mostly Carian) Table from https://tied.verbix.com/project/script/asiam.html

asiam41

NOTE                                                                                                                                                          Even one could find most of the signs in entire Anatolian sign library, cannot find all necessary signs in a single writing (e.g. carian or lycian).That’s why out of some attempts, I renounced, also due of little known even by specialists (e.g. Ignacio Adiego) of those awkard languages and writing systems.

Tabl.  Sign No.    Most frequent  2-nd frequecy

R             1                                  Sum.* ,Anat.

R           2.1                       Anat., Arch.Gr.*,Old.Lat.*

R           2.2                       Anat., Arch.Gr.*,Old.Lat.*

R           2.3                       Sum.*Anat.*Aegean*,Arch.Gr.*

R  2.4.(“o”/”c”?)     if “o”: Anatol.*,Aegean*; if “c” ,Anat.,Arch.Gr.*,Old Lat.*

R           3                                             Sum.*

R           4                                               None

R           5 (z-like)              Sum.,Anat.*,Aegean*,Arch.Gr.*,Old.Hebr.*

R       6(up;>>)                                      Anat.*

R    6(left)/bow-arrow                      Sum.,Anat.

R          7                                Anat*.,Aegean*,Old Hebrew*

R          8 (P?D?)                 Anatol.,Old Hebrew*,Arch.Gr.*,Old Lat.*                                                                               —————————————————

Sq         1                            Sum.*

Sq         2                         Sum.* Anat.

Sq         3                       Sum.*,Anatol.,Aegean

Sq         4                        Sum.*,Anatol.

Sq         5                       Sum.*Cypriot

Sq         6                       Sum.*,Aegean*

Sq  above 7              (Aegean?,elements in Anatol,)

Sq        7                            Sum.*

If every sign< pair >type of writing  has 1 point, then, out of 20 signs,number of signs found in:

Sumerian  12    ************

Anatolian  13    *************

Aegean     6 *******

Arch.Gr.   6 ******

Old Hebr.  3 ***

Cypriot    1 *

Old Lat.   4 ****


NOTE

1. IF the tablets are genuine show a direct/great sumerian influence/inspiration (11 sumerian-like signs)

2. After some unknown,direct-sumerian influenced !? , much plausible is Anatolian writing, close folowed by Aegean writing 

3.Signs “D” were used by sumerian only before 3.200 B.C., but very few and only on the ext. surface of clay tokens (bullae) with unknown meaning.                                                                      It seems due the fact that were put in the recipients column on proto-sumerian signs table, could be for “pot,jar,vessel”,                 ?measure-ration?

4. Otherwise the D-shape was not used after in writing 2.500 years till archaic greek writing,(3.200-2.500=700)

5.The “H’-sign                                                       http://aplaceofbrightness.blogspot.com/2008/11/moonlight-in-romania-tartaria-tablets_21.html

NWgridhas the exact phoenician/old hebrew (Cheth/Het) shape 58537889_m

and only close to Aegean (PA3) writings .Linear A sign PA3 has no shifted vertical bars , as our sign and Old Hebrew is.                                                                   Image from https://linearbknossosmycenae.com/tag/linear-a-decipherment/page/2/

ht-88-kikina-01-datare-figs

P.S.Capital old Hebrew and Phoenician “het” and  is identical with archaic greek Heta(boxed eta) and sumerian proto-cuneiform “Ku” (Number 3,first)Imagini pentru letter archaic eta

6. Sign>>found only in Anatolian (Carian ) writing

7. I DO NOT EXPLAIN MYSELF, HOW EXACTLY THE UPPER HALF OF THE ROUND TABLET, SUPPOSED COVERED/HIDDEN CONTAIN MOST “RECENT” SIGNS.                       POSSIBLE THIS WOULD BE THE ONLY SECTION OUT OF ENTIRE BOTH TABLETS WICH CONTAIN AN DIRECT READABLE MESSAGE ? WHAT KIND COULD BE? MILITARY SECRET NO !, ESOTERIC, RELIGIOUS-MYSTIC ?.                                                                                               YES, COULD BE THE CASE.


DON’T KNOW WHAT SCRIBE WOULD MIX (real name hodge-podge”), PICTOGRAPHIC SIGNS WITH IDEOGRAMS / SYLLABOGRAMS ?! =========================================

OUT OF SOME OUTSTANDING INTERPRETATIONS THROUGH SUMERIAN (A.A.VAIMAN and RUMEN KOLEV),                                                                                                                          AFTER SOME YEARS OF RESEARCH, A CLEAR IMAGE IS EMERGING:                               MANY SUMERIAN PROTO-CUNEIFORM SIGNS HAS EQUIVALENTS IN SHAPE IN AEGEAN WRITINGS.                                                                                                                                           AS MR. RUMEN KOLEV  FIRST NOTICED AND MADE SUCH ATTEMPTS,                              I FOUND ALSO MUCH MORE SIMILARITIES AND CULTURAL RELATIONS, AS BEEING ABLE TO DEDUCE/EXTRACT AND SHOW MUCH MORE AND CLOSE  MEANINGS.                                                                                                                                          IT IS ABOUT OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE, COMMON IN AN EXTENDED AREA ICONS, WITH THE ORIGIN FAR BACK IN TIME.

I would say, kind of finish of the Tartaria tablets research.

January 1, 2019

OUT OF SOME OUTSTANDING INTERPRETATIONS THROUGH SUMERIAN (A.A.VAIMAN and RUMEN KOLEV),                                                                                                                          AFTER SOME YEARS OF RESEARCH, A CLEAR IMAGE IS EMERGING:                               MANY SUMERIAN PROTO-CUNEIFORM SIGNS HAS EQUIVALENTS IN SHAPE IN AEGEAN WRITINGS.                                                                                                                                           AS MR. RUMEN KOLEV  FIRST NOTICED AND MADE SUCH ATTEMPTS,                              I FOUND ALSO MUCH MORE SIMILARITIES AND CULTURAL RELATIONS, AS BEEING ABLE TO DEDUCE/EXTRACT AND SHOW MUCH MORE AND CLOSE  MEANINGS.                                                                                                                                          IT IS ABOUT OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE, COMMON IN AN EXTENDED AREA ICONS, WITH THE ORIGIN FAR BACK IN TIME. =============================================

A series of aspects noticed by me, some from the very beginning (great chances to have a kind of writing) then coupled with others, sized in the course of time ( a close symilarity with sumerian proto-cuneiform writing + more inadvertencies ) got to these conclusions and results.                                                                                                                                                     My gratitude for the most of the top-level schollars in the field of proto-writing, were not sure and not “hitted the nail on the head” from the begining, but generally expressed pertinent opinions.                                                                                                           Even the signs are reflecting in a greate measure the sumerian proto-cuneiform phase, nevertheless not match sumerian proto-writng in some aspects, especially some pure technical-ones.

After that, some of the first  researchers of the Danubian writing, (e.g. Mr.Marco Merlini) correctly showed the real beginning and developement of the humanity writing , pity not sized that the “writing” finaly was not yed been discovered, and the term “writing” cannot be attached to Vinca Culture, even not that of “fully proto-writing”, despite the fact that most of the necessary steps were made.

I do not understand also, even the above-mentioned schollar had the literature and data=bases regarding the discovery and evolution of writing, preffered not to recognise the spread abroad from other places, (transmit,transfer,“import” by mean of cultural transmition/infusion) of any sign.

Instead he preffered for all the signs (wich every of them could be found in different period of time in tens of writings and places in the World) to atribute, religious conotations, thus unknown, mistycal, esoteric meanings. But attention! ; in his opinion, the meaning not known by entire Vinca comunity members, but only by the writer and the local (in this case Tartaria village) comunity members.

Don’t know how to synthetises better and by short, anyway I’ll begin:

This subject of Tartaria tablets created a global excitement and brawling, at an unmerited level I would say.

Cause of initial moment of discovery circumstances, are not clear, a series of good-willing romanians, but also foreign schollars spread “the oldest writing in the world“, a pre-sumerian one. From the very beginning the tablets were enclosed in a mist and mystical aura, some of above scientists beeing sure before any research that the signs had an unknown, long time-ago forgotten meaning, wich was of hidden, mystical and esoteric nature .(how comfortable !)

Besides that was attached an mystical content to the signs, carriers of ancient forgotten myths, the subject itself was encircled in mistery. So the subject and the tablets become mythical agai, and appeared an (unrelated to the signs and their meanings)  an secondary myth. Secondary mith fueled by some scientists, (e.g. Mr. Marco Merlini). He contributed by sustaining an very old age of the tablets. He associated the bones of a deceased person with the tablets.The bones were found in the proximity, somewhere in the rituallic-funerary complex.The bones seem to pertain to Vinca Culture, being dated at 5.500-6.000 B.C. In turn the real age of the tablets is not known and will be not known forever. I am not accusing anybody of anything, even if this assertion have unexpected bad consequences.

Studing the specialty literature, I realised that I could not rely upon archeological data. As by my part, cannot atribute any age to the tablets, so I had no choice but to analyse what is 100% sure in front of me: the signs present on the tablets.

I had an ideal goal, to have an unique, ultimate reading ( wich of course must be validated by the scientific comunity and so not being contested).

After this, I folowed the main phases:

Making an analysis of the signs, I found that the highest percentage of the tablet signs were found in sumerian proto-cuneiform sign list (this 1 year before) and in Anatolian alphabets (especially carian-ones)

The similarity with sumerian signs was noticed by many scientist begining with N.Vlassa (S.Hood, A.A.Vaiman, R.Kolev and others).The last two had a very good interpretation of the signs. Comparing my readings with their readings, I sized some slight inadvertencies /some incorect sign identifications/some incorect interpretations.                                        But only late  I got acquainted of the differencies and inadvertencies of some tablet signs from the common evolution line of sumerian proto-writing. These are mainly technical ones (relating to the technique of writing).But these very differencies are evidencies that the scribe was not a native sumerian. Folowing an independent path I come to the same conclusions regarding the signs and the scribe. These, of mine can be seen in my before posts, also read my explanations and check posting dates.                                          Of course, also I was curious in wich period were written the tablets and from wich place could be, and after comparing when and where were used such signs, I obtained some symilar conclusions;

After my research I realised that regarding the place and age are resulting different posibilities wich has every of them different chances to be real, so I put them in increasing chances order.                                                                                                             Note                                                                                                                                                         DUE OF THE PRESENCE ON THE TABLET OF A HODGEPODGE OF SIGNS, wich could be of two, even three different categories. Folowing the chances to a corect identification of the scribe and the writing time and place, (the figures are raw estimates not nail-fixed):

– sumerian writing, native sumerian scribe, 3.200-2.500 B.C., 0%

-quasi-sumerian writing, scribe of sumerian ancestry, settled in Europe,  or ” of sumerian/syrian ancestors” trader with little knowledge of writing 3.000-2.000 B.C., 5%

-quasy-sumerian writing, of innitial sumerian ancestry, (minoan) settled in Aegean area (Crete), 2500-1.200 B.C.,  20% 

writing close to/derived from Linear A/B (a local variant), minoan/Micenaean from Aegean area  2.000-1.000 B.C., 40%                                                                                       E.g.: From Cretan Hieroglyphics & Protolinear Script | Giannhs Kenanidhs and … http://www.academia.edu/…/Cretan_Hieroglyphics_and_Protolinea…                                                Linear-A is still regarded as a direct descendant of the Cretan Hieroglyphics, … making use of an originally Sumerian script (Papakitsos & Kenanidis 2015; ….. the “ma” sign is a sketch of a calf’s face (from Sumerian “amá(r)” meaning a calf), .

Eteo-Cretan-like writing, eteoCretan scribe (of sumerian ancestry sumerian settler in Crete) 1.000 B.C.-200 A.D.,  25%

archaic greek writing (archaic greek alphabet), greek writer 50%

  • arch. greek writing close to present (800-0 B.C.) greek writer 60%

-writing after Christ (A.C.) 65 %

– years 1800-1900 contemporaneus writer 70%                                                                               ——————————————————                                                                                           You see,                                                                                                                                                  I have no confidence at all in archaeological data at all, especially those regarding the age.                                                                                                                                                       Having the only tool, (analising the signs ), I concluded that there are zero chances to have an original sumerian writing; it could be at best an sumerian-influenced/inspired writing.But the very signs “D-letter”-shaped are pushing only to only two large spanned in time outcomes:                                                                                                                                   1 – one when sumerian only begun to scratch D-singns on tokens (clay volume bullae), and not on clay tablets !  (3.500-3.200 B.C.), wich has close to zero chances, and                  2 – after another 2500 years later, (at least!) when begun to be used those signs in archaic greek alphapets and writing. So the only real credible result is that the tablets are quite new, at least 800-500 B.C. but with great chances much, much newer.                                —————————————————————————————————————                         After me, would be even an old signs scraping  exercise or sqetch of an unknown person, wich had relative knowledge of, and knows some sumerian signs also knows some Anatolian signs, but have slight knoledge of that signs and not skilled in such writings.

? Zsofia Torma, knew sumerian and also Anatolian signs, she currently compared the signs from this 2 writings with those found on artefacts wich had discovered.It is more than strange that 1-2 years before, I found those 2 writings (proto-cuneiform and Anatolian) were closest to tablet’s writing.This could be an veridic, close to reality explanation for the presence on the tablets of a hodgepodge of signs. She made archeological research also in places containing roman artefacts. Possible she made for herself the tablets, only to exercise tracing of the signs on clay, as sumerians does before.It is weird an totaly uncommon for a true scribe to mix sumerian,Anatolian and Aegean signs!

  • ? Torma Jozsef, father archaeologist, catolic religion

– ? Karoly Torma, brother, archaeologist, catolic religion. Top-level epigraphist of his time.Made archeological research in many Dacian archaeological sites and related to romans.Knew many languages, and received the title of doctor in philology.

an german, hungarian or romanian archaeologist and researcher, close aquintance of Mr. Zsofia Torma.

ALL COULD BE RELATED TO Mrs. TORMA, father and brother through the title DDoc THIS WAS THE ONLY RESULTobtained by Google  search-engine :ATESTATION IN WRITING OF THIS “D D o c” SEQUENCE ; it is the abbreviation of the latin “decretorum doctor” wich is “profesor of (theologic) doctrine” .Possible she received them (the tablets) as a gift from somebody, no wonder,could be in vicinity time of receiveng the academic title of doctor in science.The cruel reality is the fact that when the doctor title becomed effective she was allready dead.

Hope this last hypothesys is only a funny-one, cause if would be true will be too much for me, wich I cannot bear.

ATTENTION ! I DO NOT SUSPECT ANY PERSON TO HAD BAD INTENTIONS, NOR TO MAKE A FAKE. Nothing on this part.

PROBABLY IS AN OMENED/ILL-FATED CHAIN OF EVENTS OR ONE COULD SAY:                A SUCCESION OF MISSFORTUNATE EVENTS” ======================================================

OUT OF SOME OUTSTANDING INTERPRETATIONS THROUGH SUMERIAN (A.A.VAIMAN and RUMEN KOLEV),                                                                                                                          AFTER SOME YEARS OF RESEARCH, A CLEAR IMAGE IS EMERGING:                               MANY SUMERIAN PROTO-CUNEIFORM SIGNS HAS EQUIVALENTS IN SHAPE IN AEGEAN WRITINGS.                                                                                                                                           AS MR. RUMEN KOLEV  FIRST NOTICED AND MADE SUCH ATTEMPTS,                              I FOUND ALSO MUCH MORE SIMILARITIES AND CULTURAL RELATIONS, AS BEEING ABLE TO DEDUCE/EXTRACT AND SHOW MUCH MORE AND CLOSE  MEANINGS.                                                                                                                                          IT IS ABOUT OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE, COMMON IN AN EXTENDED AREA ICONS, WITH THE ORIGIN FAR BACK IN TIME.