The Tartaria tablet’s scribe was a dilettante !?


First of all, I am reminding you that all three tablets are containing rather a medley/congeries/hotchpotch of signs.                                                                               Worse, there are 3 distinct types of signs:                                                                                          – pure pictographic-ones , on the squarred tablet without hole. Every picture is representing exact the object pictured: goat-picture for goat, vegetal motif for vegetal (e.g. cereal); bad drawn silhuette for kind of personage.                                                              – a category of signs between pictograms and syllabograms. Even we have “head-with-ears” and “closed-contour” signs, that signgns there are rather logograms or ideograms, “calf” and “house/temple” .Those signs are on the squarred tablet with hole.                         – On the round tablet, signs could be as well ideograms but also syllabograms and even letters (letters on upper half).                                                                                                               All signs on all 3 tablets not pertain to a single attested writing sistem. The signs seem have different origins in time and space.Such great number of signs are found only in the proto-cuneiform stage.                                                                                                                     ——————————————————–                                                                                             If attempt to interpret tablets using sumerian proto-cuneiform signs, the first dificulty encountered is that only half of the signs have exact sumerian shape, the rest are more or less “alike”.In no instance sumerian used scratched D-shape signs. the signs for number 1/60 have some-howe close shape but they made them by imprinting. The gar sign wich is read ninda. “bread” wich represented food-cereal portion, is a D wich in fact has inside a paralel stroke. So writing it is not original sumerian.Sumerians not used mixing/combining different type of signs (pictograms combined with ideograms). Even in the learning tablets they proceed by making lists with ocuppations, and list with determinatives (wood products, numbers etc). Every period of time is reflecting its stage of writing developement).                                                                                                                      ———————————————————                                                                                                   No Anatolian writing could be applied for reading attempt, despite that there are many signs from different Anatolian writings (especially from Carian). Have no sufficient signs ; e.g. from carian alphabets (only few are missing).                                     ——————————————————                                                                                                 This “cronical lack of signs” is happening if one try to use every known writing: Cretan hieroglyphic, linear A, Linear B and so on. ==========================================                                                                                            Why diletante ?                                                                                                                    Because no scribe and in no known instance in the World displayed an hotchpotch of signs. And because,  (personally don’t know how comes or happened), it semms, there are evidences :                                                                                                                                            – not (serious) intention to write,                                                                                                         – lack of neccesary knowledge, but rather                                                                                      – unwanting, unaware the scribe put on that tablets a heap of signs wich normally could not be found in the same period of time. Exemple:                                                             – Exact shaped D signs and ladder-signs were not used by sumerians.                              This ladder-shape was used by sumerians in proto-cuneiform stage (sign Ku, closed contour shape), by Cretans (hierogliphic Cretan/first from 2.500-2.200B.C.) and Linear A,B

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-Cretan-Hieroglyphic-table-of-signs-by-Evans-1909-232-3_fig1_273096050 Semnul Nr.45

But with exact this speciphic shape with “slanted/offset bars “was used only by Canaanite, Phoenician, Paleo-hebrew, archaic Greek (Cretan) and Phoenician- inspired Mediterranean writings (e.g. Etruscan,Venetic, south-Iberian etc.)                       – D shape was not used in any writing as for D-letter before archaic-greek writing/alphabets (first rounded D used in Chalcis,800-500 B.C.!)                                             Even little before, the P/D shapes were used in Crete for letter “R“. See:                                An Archaic Greek Inscription from Crete Author(s): Lilian H. Jeffery and Anna Morpurgo-Davies                                                                                                                          https://www.ling-phil.ox.ac.uk/files/jeffery-amd_archaic_greek_inscription_from_crete_british_museum_quarterly_36_1971.pdf                                                              ==================================

Some few question remains :                                                                                                                  – from wich period of time (possible lasting to nowdays) was “the writer“?                        …. Even I understand that from early Bronze age aegean and Crete was an efervescent different cultures and commercial crossing, but what is bothering me and really make me angry is the fact that I don’t know for sure:                                                                               – when and from where he/she/”writer” got  acquaintance of the sumerian proto-cuneiform sign AB and sumerian AMAR/Aegean Ma signs ?                                                         Note                                                                                                                                                   In this situation nobody expects that every tablet to carry an concrete, fully understandable logical message, and much less to have a relation/corelation betweeen that messages)                                                                                                                                                    Even in the above described messy situation and context, there is a slight but real possibility, if writer come from a not so far period of time, with knowledge of the archaic greek writing (and greek or latin language), to have an real writing only in the upper half of the round tablet (the same part with signs wich happens to be covered and hidden by the other squarred tablet with hole).                           ———————————————————————                                                                              Out of many scientists, only Marco Merlini is for a “Danubian writing“. But not sustaining with one exemple that Vinca-Turdas Culture got to the final stage of true writing. Not showed that got even to proto-writing stage, and not interpreting one sign. He preffered to give “unknown, forgotten, mystical meaning” for every sign.                                                                                                                                                                                  Other scientists showed similarity with sumerian proto-writing (A.Falkenstein, A.A.Vaiman,R.Kolev) but stressed that there is no proper sumerian proto-writing (Falkenstein,Vaiman).                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           All others beeing puzzled by rather unusual weird  sign composition, are reffering to kind of sumerian or other writing mimicry. As a consequence, the scribe possible extracted no message from the tablets.                                                                                        Also many of them are for an illiterate scribe wich used the tablets only as paraphernalia,”hiera”: religious-related object wich helped in performing some religious rituals.                                                                    ========================================

From The Lost Civilizations of the Stone Age https://books.google.ro/books?isbn=0684862700 Richard Rudgley

“But the string-holes on two of the Tartaria tablets appear to be a feature without … that the tablets represented a garbled and ‘senseless’ mimicry of Near Eastern ..”

From an investigation into the origins of writing – Forums.gr http://www.forums.gr/filedata/fetch?id=1875482

It should be pointed out that the early date ascribed to the Tărtăria tablets has …. made as mimicryof the signs themselves, in imitation of an admired culture”

 From the tartaria tablets – jstor https://www.jstor.org/stable/24926226 by MSF Hood

“SUMERIAN WRITING of the period around 3000 B.C. covers a clay tablet found at Jemdet. Nasr’ in Mesopotamia. … on tablets found at Tartaria in Romania (see illustration on opposite page). ….. prehending imitation of more civilized peoples’ …”

From The Mystery of Tatárlaka • Klára Friedrich – Cakravartin cakravartin.com/wordpress/wp-content/…/mystery-of-tatarlaka-klara-friedrich.pdf

 Tatárlaka signs were just an imitation of the Sumerian writing and were brought to…”

From Chapter 3 “Existence of an archaic script in Southeastern Europe: A … https://www.academia.edu/…/Chapter_3_Existence_of_an_archaic_script_in_Southeas…

Tărtăria tablets, the icon on the possibility of a European Neolithic writing ….. It is well-known that the apotropaic power is specially felt among illiterate people” …

From THE ORIGIN OF WRITING: – Dacia.org www.dacia.org/no-one.html

These tablets revealed a much older version of the same flood legend. …. a way to extend memory but also a tool for the elite to justify their rule upon the common, illiterate people. .”.

From Protochronism – Wikiwand www.wikiwand.com/en/Protochronism

Also noted are the exploitation of the Tărtăria tablets as certain proof that writing originated on proto-Dacian … A Dacian script or the work of an illiterate potter?

 From Aspects of the Balkans: Continuity and Change: Contributions to the … https://books.google.ro/books?isbn=311088593X

Henrik Birnbaum, ‎Speros Vryonis -Analogies to the Vinča script occur in the earliest Sumerian writing of the Late … A. Falkenstein, “Zu den Tontafelnaus Tartaria”,      “. Of 24 signs on the Tartaria tablets five correspond to signs from Mesopotamia.”

From The Tartaria Tablets | Antiquity | Cambridge Core https://www.cambridge.org/…/tartaria-tablets/C824E021256A41A254FF5A847EB57E0… by MSF Hood – ‎1967 –

It seems unlikely however that the tablets were drafted by a Sumerian hand or in the Sumerian …. [25] A. Falkenstein, Archaische Texte aus Uruk (Ausgrabungen in .”

From interdisciplinarity in archaeology and historical linguistics https://periodicos.ufpel.edu.br/ojs2/index.php/lepaarq/article/download/4888/4476 by M Mertzani –

“(GIMBUTAS, 1982) such as the Vinča–Turdaș tablets ca. …. scripts also demonstrate similarities; that is, half of the signs are similar to Linear A scripts. ….. MERLINI, M. A comparison between the signs from Tartaria, the Danube script and …”

From Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis https://books.google.ro/books?id=q-pjwVI1Vz0C

“The hypothesis that the Tartaria tablets represent only a writing-like design was … made with a magic purpose without any real understanding, possibly by a person who saw the usage of such tablets .”

 From The Civilization of Ancient Crete https://books.google.ro/books?isbn=0520034066 Ronald Frederick Willetts

copied for magical purposes, without understanding of their meaning, from the … Similarities between the Tartaria tablets and the earliest known clay tablets of ..”

From TĂRTĂRIA AND THE SACRED TABLETS http://www.cimec.ro/pdf/dl.asp?filename=Lazarovici-Merlini-Tartaria-and-the-Sacred-Tablets-2011.pdf

“We also note when single Transylvanian signs are in alignment with the set of signs established by subsequent ancient scripts such as the Indus script, the Akkadian cuneiform, Hieroglyphic Luwian, Cretan Linear A, Cretan Hieroglyphic, and Cypriot syllabary. The main aim is not to find hazardous hits from analogies with other systems of writing in order to implement the ‘decipherment’ of the messages encoded in the tablets. It is to verify whether or not the Transylvanian informational geometries are restricted to the Danube script, or if they are also rooted in other literacy systems of the ancient world…………………                                                               We will investigate the signs from Tărtăria starting from the observation we have already formulated in different articles and books concerning the coexistence on them of an exoteric message and an esoteric one1181. It is noteworthy to consider the possibility of overlapping the two tablets, both bearing a round puncture and divided into cells. The hole on the rectangular tablet fi ts precisely the hole on the circular tablet, and the former artifact perfectly covers the upper register of the latter with their cells in perfect alignment. The lower edge of the oblong tablet exactly superimposes the horizontal line running on the round tablet, and the vertical line incised on the fi rst artifact from the edge of the hole downwards meets exactly the vertical line incised on the lower register of the larger artifact thus forming a continuous line. This superimposability could mean that the rectangular and circular drilled tablets have been worn one over the other as pendants of a necklace, the small rectangular tablet placed over the larger disc-shaped one. Mo re signifi cantly, the possibility to overlap the two artifacts could also mean that overt (seen) signs and esoteric (hidden) signs both occur in the resulting assemblage between them (i.e., the signs on the upper register of the circular tablet would have been covered). The tablets aggregate the attributes of ritual artifacts, amulet-tablets, and amulet-archives possibly worn by Milady Tărtăria1182.                                                                                        The message to be conveyed by the tablets is likely based on a relationship between exot eric and esoteric signs. The fact that the two punctured tablets could have been utilized as superimposed exoteric and esoteric amulets is indicative of the magical associations of the script1183. The upper esoteric register of the disk-shaped tablet was hidden to uninitiated persons. It was necessary to lift up the oblong tablet in order to see the secret text incised on the upper register of the circular tablet. The question of the non-visibility of some texts is not only indicative of magical associations of the Danube script and its employment in liturgies, but it reveals even the sacral nature connected with initiation processes of this kind of literacy. Was the sacr ed inscribed compound particularly in use during initiation ceremonies?                                 If this was the case, it does not facilitate any attempts to decipher the incised signs since one is dealing with texts that challenge the un-expressible, not only reveal but also conceal and sidetrack, and finally indicate something to mean something else. …………………..                                                                                                                         They were worn or hung, one over the other, and the resulting combination may have created a relationship of overt (seen) and esoteric (hidden) signs (i.e., the signs on the upper register of the circular tablet would have been covered). ………………

Nonetheless, the original Near Eastern signs of literacy might have lost their authentic functions having been merely copied and used as symbols of a religious or magical character without an understanding of what they actually meant.Semiotically, the hypothesis that the Tărtăria tablets bear only a writing-like design is based on the argument that the signs of literacy do not appear together in the same groups as they do on the Mesopotamian tablets. Two signs that occur separated, but in adjacent groups, on the Tărtăria discoid tablet are joined together on some of the Jemdet Nasr tablets to compose the name of a god: EN-GI.                                                        A Transylvanian “intellectual” copied two Sumerian signs, but was not capable to unite them to write properly the divine name. No scholar from that side expresses doubts that perhaps the ancient Transylvanians had no intention to write down the name of a Sumerian god. According to them, the illiterate presence of signs of literacy at Tărtăria might refl ect the awareness that they were marks of great power, combined with ignorance of the signifi cance of writing. The conviction that signs of literacy are carriers of magic powers is exactly the reason why their mere graphic imitations have been deposited in a ritual pit-grave with fragments of human bones. “The tablets, in all probability, are mere imitation of original Mesopotamian ones, made with a magic purpose without any real understanding,possibly by a person who saw the usage of such tablets somewhere, between Southern Mesopotamia and Southeastern Europe, without a real knowledge, however, of the art of writing…”                                                             ==============================

In my long-term research, (allmost 10-12 years), in the Tartaria tablets sumerian approach/reading attempts, I extracted all possible meanings. I could say even more, if comparing with other scientists reading attempts.                                                                  As one easily can see my papers with critics on A.Falkenstein, A.A.Vaiman and Rumen Kolev interpretations.As you will se I found in their papers some wrong sign identifications, missing interpretation of some signs etc.                                                  Even they are top-level assyrologists and some high-specialised in sumerian proto-writing= sumerian proto-cuneiform, I have no explanation at hand, probably this was caused only by rush?/ not according sufficient time for analisis, in order to get as close as possible to every single sign.

Also without emphasys, from my recollection, I was the single one to close-compare the signs with Aegean writings signs (Cretan hieroglyphic, Linear A and Linear B) trying to interpret them and extract possible meanings

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter 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: