Two main issues regarding Tartaria tablets wich remained unclarified.

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                                                                           “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                                                     “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                                                                       ”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                                                                     ”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]


From   ”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                                                                               ”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)).”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: