Tartaria tablets

Last chance given to the tablets from Tartaria !?

Careful! 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. Its role is to try and test different writings. 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 from the unknown). Most of the signs come from the Sumerian proto-wedge-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. Falcenstein 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. ======== Sounds silly, emphatic, that is; how, to whom do I give a chance, to humanity, to world culture? In fact, I give it to myself, because it is essentially just to my continuous and consistent effort over about 11 years. In the event of notable progress, then one can speak of a contribution to European or Aegean culture for example. What determined me to resume the approach? The fact that I exhausted a series of hypotheses materialized through a series of test readings, not accepting any reservations. Then my thoughts settled somehow and I realized that of all the hypotheses, few, more precisely, only one has real chances. This is due to a series of reasons, mainly scientific, but not only.

WHY I COMPLETELY ELIMINATED THE ‘SUMERIAN HYPOTHESIS’

The signs on the tablets, compared to any of the writing systems in the world, indeed the signs most closely resemble those of the Sumerian proto-cuneiform. Years ago I didn’t even know they existed, but after I found out about them and saw them, it was as if new gates and horizons had opened up for me. Not only have I seen this resemblance but also others before me, (1965) researchers of the highest level in the field (Adam Falkenstein / Germany Zu den Tontafeln aus Tartaria, (1965) and Aizik Abramovici Vaiman / USSR).  But they and I said each in his own way that only resembles.

https://de.suenee.cz/zahada-tartarijskych-hlinenych-tabulek << In 1965 brachte der deutsche Sumerologe Adam Falkenstein die… dass die Texte in Tartaria unter dem Einfluss von Sumer entstanden sind. >>

They turned around and averting, in a rather elegant manner  (Vaiman: “quasi-Sumerian writing”) I was more determined and looking more than them and adding a number of more concrete evidences & clues. Archaeological archeology. Спб, 1994. Вып. 3. Аннотации… http://www.archeo.ru ›…› Annotations of issues A. A. Vaiman. On the Quasi – Sumerian tablets from Tartaria. I can’t explain why the scollars didn’t proceed to express their opinion in a more determined way, but they preferred an approach like this, “with the spirit of gentleness”. They who should have seen better than me what sign and how much, to what extent they resemble the Sumerian correspondent. But being specialized in Sumerian proto-writing, it did not even cross their minds to see if the signs somehow resemble the oldest Aegean signs and writings. They took the signs in the hypothesis “if they were Sumerian” and interpreted them accordingly. All the interpretations of these scientists with expertise in Assyriology but with high specialization in the field of proto-cuneiform writing have obtained very good results similar to each other and similar to my interpretation.

Third, Rumen Kolev / Bulgaria also obtained very good results, even in a way surpassed them, even if I have the impression he was influenced by the research of those who preceded his. But I repeat, he has a valuable personal contribution in interpretation. ПЛОЧКИТЕ ОТ ТАРТАРИЯ И ЧАШАТА ОТ СУВОРОВО – ДВА “НАДПИСА” НА РАННАТА ДУНАВСКА КУЛТУРА И РАЗШИФРОВАНЕТО ИМ Румен Колев http://www.su-varna.org/izdanij/Magazin%201%20conf/Pages%20from%2046%20to%2053 .pdf  

Without false modesty my interpretation is more complete than all of them, and made more accurately. I was surprised to see how other researchers did not recognize some signs, others misinterpreted and other “details” like that. The reasons for elimination as tablets to be Sumerian are many, most of them technnical (about 10 in number) regarding the concrete form of the signs themselves, but also the technique specific to the “writing” of the Sumerians. But the main reason was to rule out the possibility that some friable objects were brought by someone from such a distance, or it was in extremes  a place closer to Syria. Decisive was the finding and deduction that the tablets were either inscribed between 3,200-2,800 IEN or after 1925. Why? Quite simple: in all this “in between” interval, no man on earth could see any of them cause being buried meters of earth / rubble under a temple in Uruk (Warka) NOTE: The scribe, the author of found by the way, so intentionally, to create in the round tablet but also in the perforated rectangular tablet a compartmentalization of the symbols, apparently according to the Sumerian model. In any case, at least in the case of the perforated rectangular tablet, the Sumerians did not do so; if they made compartments, columns in no case isolated only two or even a single symbol, as happens in our perforated rectangular tablet. This leads us to the separate interpretation of the symbols in each of the compartments made, whether a compartment contains two signs or just one. This means that they each sign had a distinct, sacred significance and therefore of great importance, and possibly leaned on them one by one during the supposed religious rituals !?. This facilitates the interpretation (I would avoid term reading) because in the case of proto-writing only a rough meaning can be extracted and not a concrete one, explicit and clear as in the case of writing. Ceremonial and ritual objects were used as a means to establish or maintain communication between the sacred (the transcendent or supernatural realm) and the profane (the realm of time, space and cause and effect). Occasionally, such objects have been used to compel the sacred (or divine) realm to act or react in a manner that is favorable to participants in ceremonies or persons or activities to which such rituals relate or to prevent the transcendent realm, to injure or endanger them. These objects can thus be mediating devices to contact the divine world.                                                

 THE PROBLEM OF THE AGE OF THE TABLES AND OF THE TYPE OF WRITING                                           Initially, Romanian archaeologists established that the tablets come from a Neolithic Vinca layer and established that they date from around 5.300 BC. ! Initially they talked about the “origin of writing in the Danube area”, (Merlini: “Scrittura e nata in Europa?” / Was writing born in Europe?) And then soon after, to descend from the celestial space and talk about a script. Script does not mean writing like the ancient Scriptures, but a script means a collection of signs. Although the name leads to the idea of ​​handmade signs, this is not necessary, see the Faistos disc. It contains a collection of signs, script but signs  printed with stamps or something like that. After that a controversy started, in fact heated discussions about dating. 2400-2.700 BCE .                                                                                                         The tablets of Tǎrtǎria. An enigma? A reconsideration and… http://www.persee.fr ›dha_0755-7256_1993_num_19_1_2073… Vlassa in a subsequent paper, dated the tablets“ around (2700?) 2600-2400 BC ”, ironically naming the adepts of radiocarbon dating as “radiocarbonists ”(Vlassa 1970. I’m not trying to clarify: with what expertise and on what basis did he state that the signs are close (otherwise  perfectly true) to those from the Jemdet Nasr period !? It should be noted that nowhere in the world was a single proto-writing found before 3.500 IEN. The oldest appeared in Sumer, Iran and Egypt, almost simultaneously around (but not earlier than!) 3.500 IEN, followed by the Proto-Elamite writings and the script of the Indus Valley. https://sites.utexas.edu/dsb/tokens/tokens/  

Fig. 4) Impressed tablet from Godin Tepe, Iran, ca. 3100 BC. courtesy Cuyler Young Jr., Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. The small circular signs stand for 1 large measure of grain, the wedges for a small measure of grain.

From Harappa.com 62. How old is the oldest ancient Indus writing? Asko Parpola: “The earliest examples of Indus writing are from the Early Harappan Kot Diji period, which at Harappa is dated to c. 2800-2600 BCE.”

For all this, the type of writing is proto-writing, in which ideograms and logograms are used. Cuneiform writing proper appeared only after 2800 I.E.N. The closest example is Sumerian proto-writing in which they use proto-cuneiform signs. A “curiosity” (actually more than that and maybe more serious) is the appearance and the presence on the our three tablets simultaneously, one on each, of three types of writing: pictographic, ideographic-logographic and syllabic-alphabetic. This should raise big questions, but you can’t believe it, no one bothered with that. To me it is more than a strange thing, not knowing another instance of this kind in the world. It is as if someone wanted to show someone else the evolution of world writing and / or at the same time or the author to display “show off” his knowledge in the field. Normally I expected from the author to use only one type of writing, namely current, that of his age and time! In this kind of presentation of the author in which he rather displayed a collection of signs, it makes impossible a unitary interpretation (a single story, a linked message) of the whole set of three tablets.                                                                

 THE PROBLEM OF AUTHENTICITY                                                                                                               There were many factual elements that suit us or not, they come to question their authenticity (the absence of the discoverer at the time of discovery, the absence of any witnesses, the uncertainty regarding the layer to which they belong, the burning in the oven >> the impossibility of dating with C14, etc. ) The fact that the top half of the round tablet contains signs that appeared much more recently and did not exist as Sumerian proto-cuneiform signs at least, made me even more question their authenticity. The presence of the signs in the upper half of the round tablet in the archaic Greek alphabets and the detection by others and me too, that the author did not master the writing (according to some it was completely illiterate) contributed to this suspicion. I deduced the possibility that the author knew how to write, but only using the signs he knew well and with which he knew how to write: “archaic Greek letters”, present in the upper half of the round tablet (HD; DD o? / C ?). Even so, it can be explained why worn together around the neck (hung by a string), the rectangular tablet covers the upper half of the round one. ! So that it cannot be read by contemporaneous passers-by! That is why, and even more so, I admit that I started to suspect the circle around Zsofia Torma and especially the one around N.Vlassa without finding any clue or presumed guilty. In fact, knowing and using very old signs presupposes that in one way or another, the one who inscribed the signs has an idea of ​​them, at least in the sea. However, it is certain that he had an idea of ​​them only “largely”. Even this is not absolutely possible IF the author were somewhere close to our days. It seems that even in the period 800-300 BCE both the Sumerian proto-cuneiform and the early Aegean signs were unknown, both writings being buried. The Sumerian ones were found / unearthed in 1925 / Woolley and the Aegean ones shortly before 1900 / A.Evans.                                                              

A DILEMMA WHOSE SOLUTION CAN BRING LIGHT INTO THE PROBLEM OF AUTHENTICITY    There are two situations of which only one can be real: 1. The round tablet contains in the upper half signs, numbers of Sumerian origin and the Sumerian invoice, for a commercial transaction or archaic Greek letters. It is obvious that there is no reason for them to be hidden. It would mean that the author did not even intend to hide them; the fact that the round tablet would be half covered by the rectangular one is a pure coincidence. 2. The author intended to cover the message on the upper half of the round one (both perforated tablets being hanged by a leather string). We are implicitly forced to find a reason to hide the signs. The signs in this case should come from the Aegean area. It is impossible to have a certainty which variant is the real one. This exposes me to a major risk when we know that most extremely old inscriptions (eg in Sumerians) have an administrative content. Because I set out from the beginning to give one last chance to interpret them based on the Aegean script, it is clear that I have to go for the second option. There are also two aspects that I hope are only seemingly irreconcilable: – the presence on the tablets of some clearly Sumerian signs, for example the signs “Ab”, “AMAR” etc. (perforated rectangular tablet) on the one hand and – the presence on the tablets of the signs Heta(Eta), Delta / Rho, omicron, lunate sigma (in the upper half of the round tablet) This situation, I must say with all the bitterness, makes me feel I’m researching a criminal field.                                                                                                               

WHICH IS ALMOST THE ONLY HYPOTHESIS WITH REAL CHANCE, AND WHY.

According to the hypothesis of the presence of signs similar to the Sumerian ones, the closest writing by point of view of the proximity of the area and the antiquity is that of the presence of some Aegean “Proto-Linear” signs. I was pleasantly surprised and a new perspective opened up for me when I became acquainted with the studies of the Greek researchers I. Papakitsos and G. Kenanidis. They claim that the beginnings of writing in the Aegean area are simply due to the presence of early Sumerian settlers.                                                                                                            A 17th c. BC Minoan Votive Double Ax (Labrys). The Arkalochori Ax and its siblings http://www.anistor.gr/english/enback/2016_1s_Anistoriton.pdf << To say that the inscription Aa (Archalokori Ax) belongs to Linear A would be at least inaccurate, for two reasons: Linear documents The existing A uses, as the name suggests, linear signs, while the ax signs are more pictorial, with a not so strict orientation1 and flatter, bi‐dimentionale; and, existing Linear A inscriptions usually convey non-Sumerian languages ​​used by non-Sumerian nationalities living in Minoan Crete, while this ax, like all C.H. documents, is an appearance of an original inscription by the Minoan Sumerians. >>

I tested an attempt to interpret the signs using Aegean signs. Paradoxically, the interpretation is not far from Sumerian interpretations. Why? Because some ideograms have a similar meaning to the Sumerians and the Aegeans. Since then, the DDoo sign sequence has been an insurmountable obstacle for me. Because “D” signs did not exist in the Sumerians but also in the Aegean area before 1000 IEN. These appeared in Proto-Sinaitic writing around 1,000 IEN and in the Aegean area even later, after 1,000 IEN (600-800IEN Chalcis). The other day I saw a work in which all the signs from all types of ancient Aegean writings were reviewed, even comparing them with each other:

MINOAN LINEAR A Original title of the first edition (Sheffield 1987): THE ONOMASTICS OF THE ‘MINOAN LINEAR A’ AND ‘LINEAR B’ DOCUMENTS AND THEIR HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE by Peter George van Soesbergen.                                                                                                             That’s when I realized second time again, but the signs that I can’t find an equivalent among the Aegean ones are extremely few. This on the one hand, and on the other hand, even with an initially presumed lack of some, it is pointless not to do this approach. I propose a goal as advanced as that of the interpretation of the tablets. In the first phase I will limit myself to trying to find the equivalent of each sign in the Aegean writings. By this I will be able to prove their origin.  I could leave the interpretation for phase II of my research.  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~                                                               These two situations, ( quasi-Sumerian signs “as/like-Sumerian ”, with the appearance of Sumerian signs) and the one in which there are signs similar to the Aegean ones, of Aegean type/guy, create two distinct situations with consequences of overwhelming importance: The first situation offers the conditions for an easy interpretation, as the signs are somewhat more similar to the Sumerian ones, signs that can be found more easily in the Sumerian Proto-cuneiform  signaries. Their significance seems to be fairly well known to specialists. But it also means that someone intentionally or unintentionally produced artifacts that “want to look like” something. This implies the idea and the paractic consequence of deceiving and the possible existence more or less of some forgeries. I dislike and attacked this situation and showed how and why many signs just “seem to be Sumerian” and I offered an interpretation similar to those offered by top specialists. Note that proto-cuneiform signs belong to proto-writing (ideograms and logograms) and therefore do not belong to writing proper and therefore do not use a language (in this case Sumerian). This does not mean that many signs are not associated with Sumerian ones and has a phonetic correspondent. The second situation makes the approach more difficult for me, because here we have (like in Linear A) both ideograms and syllabograms. The Cretan-hieroglyphic and Linear A writings are still present in the category of undeciphered writings. . I will have to show and keep track of the signs that are not found in identical form among the Aegean, the identical-Aegean and the similar-Aegean ones for which I must find the closest possible graphic equivalent.                                                                                                               ========== AEGEAN SCRIPTS ==========                                                                                            From How undeciphered is an undeciphered script? – Oxbow Bookswww.oxbowbooks.com ›oxbow› blog ›2017/07/14 << Writing in Bronze Age Greece. The writing systems that have survived this period are all syllabic (ie each sign represents an entire syllable, not just a letter) and are in various stages of “deciphering”. Cretan hieroglyphic writing. (2,100-1,700 I.E.N.) It survives in about 3,300 inscriptions and remains very little understood, although we know little about its relationship to the other scriptures. One problem is that the inscriptions are often decorative and it is difficult to say how to read them – it presents some problems similar to the decorative Mayan writing. Although some signs look similar to those in lines A and B, which means we can guess their values, their “pictorial” nature is quite different from the more abstract shapes of the signs in the other systems. Linear Writing A (1,800-1,450 I.E.N.) Line A survives in about 1,500 inscriptions, many clay tablets and seals, although other items such as jewelry, pottery and stone vessels have been inscribed. It is usually labeled as “undeciphered”, but this is a good example of scripture in which we could read sequences aloud reasonably accurately, as many of its signs are shared (along with their values) by writing Linear B deciphered later. . However, we do not understand the language of the inscriptions, except that we can determine the meaning of a word in its context (especially the word for “total”, ku-ro, which appears at the end of the lists). Linear Writing B (1,450-1,200 I.E.N.) survives in about 6,000 inscriptions and is the only fully deciphered Bronze Age script in the Aegean Sea. Michael Ventris broke the code and announced its decipherment in 1952, proving that the language written in Linear B was an early form of Greek. Almost all surviving examples are administrative documents made of clay, and because we understand their contents, we can extract from them a wealth of historical information about the economy of the Mycenaean world. >> NOTE: Because it is very difficult to extract the equivalent Aegean signs and to show them to you, to put a picture of them, some (few) of the equivalent signs found in the writings Cretana Hieroglifica, Linear A and Linear B, I will extract them from the indicated work above. The sign will be indicated by me: Type of writing / page / no. sign, ex Linear A / pag12 / sign 5 will be A / 12/5.                                                                                                                                                      ======= ….overlaps between the Cretan script and other scriptures, such as the hieroglyphic scriptures of Cyprus and the Hittite countries of Anatolia, may suggest that they all evolved from a common ancestor, a now lost script, originally from Syria. ======                                        In the case of an approach with notable results regarding an interpretation using the Aegean signs, implicitly results an age of the tablets of maximum 2,800 BCE. The resemblance of a small number of signs (ligatured trapezoids, arched& arrow, ..) more with the Sumerian ones than with the Aegean ones could be an indicator of the presence of a strong early Sumerian influence. In other words, the tablets from Tartaria could serve to Mr. Papakitsos and Kenanidis as an argument and the best physical evidence in support of the research works  which evidences a strong Sumerian influence for the beginnings of writing in the Aegean area. Moreover, the writing was introduced to the Aegean area in Crete directly from Sumer, some of the first Minoans being in fact migrants from Sumer.                                                                                                                       

THE INSCRIPTIONS WERE MADE BY A MINOIC SUMERIAN From Crete, Cyclades, Anatolia or Levant (Syria) ? we do not know.

(PDF) Some syllabograms of the animal category in the… http://www.researchgate.net ›publication› 340771705_Some_… Some syllabograms of the animal category in the Cretan Protolinear Script Ioannis K. Kenanidis Evangelos C. Papakitsos << The present study is focuses on linguistic evidence that demonstrates the origins of those Eastern settlers who initiated the Minoan civilization shown to be related to the archaic Sumerian culture through the features of the Aegean scriptures. >>Minoan Sumerian | Giannhs Kenanidhs – Academia.edu http://www.academia.edu ›Minoan_Sumerian A Comparative Linguistic Study about the Sumerian Influence on the Creation of the Aegean Scripts Ioannis K. Kenanidis1, Evangelos C. Papakitsos * 2 << Sumerienii s-au dovedit to be excellent traders and settlers throughout the Middle East, even at the end of the Uruk period [56]. According to Kramer [57]: “By the third millennium BC, there was good reason to believe that Sumerian culture and civilization had penetrated, at least to some extent, into East India and the West into The Mediterranean Sea, as well as the south of ancient Ethiopia and as far north as the Caspian Sea. ”Crete was known to Mesopotamia at least since the era of Sargon the Great, who lived between the 24th and 23rd centuries BC. [58]. >>                                                                                                                          …. For the first time I’ve learned of a possible intrusion of the Sumerians in Europe (Crete) with the practical result of the appearance of the Cretan Hieroglyphic and Linear A scripts of ideographic-consonantal nature followed by the linear writing B, consonantal = syllabary, from the works of Greek researchers E.C.Papakitsos and I.K. Kenanidis. The schollars speak of a proto-linear scripture which was the forerunner of the others. In this, they tried to show the evidence regarding an initial Sumerian contribution and influence.

(PDF) Minoan Sumerian | Giannhs Kenanidhs – Academia.edu http://www.academia.edu ›Minoan_Sumerian A Comparative Linguistic Study about the Sumerian Influence on the Creation of the Aegean Scripts Ioannis K. Kenanidis1, Evangelos C. Papakitsos *                        << The hypothesized protolinear script consists of 120 syllables of the V and CV models, as found in Linear-A / B scripts, one for each syllable of a dialect close to the archaic Sumerian language. … .So we have a script of simplified icons (signs), which describe elements, where the phonetic value of each sign is related to the archaic Sumerian word for the described object. Many of them are related to associated signs of the Cretan hieroglyph, also with Sumerian pictograms and sometimes with equivalent cuneiforms. … .The comparative study was conducted in parallel, including four factors:

 the painted object and its sign in the Aegean scripture,

 the relation and similarity of the previous sign with the Sumerian equivalent,

 the phonetic value attributed to the sign in the Aegean Script,

 the resemblance of the previous phonetic value with Sumerian words denoting the described object. …                                                                                                                                                      ..Following the methodology mentioned above, the entire Linear-A / B sign set can be identified as monosyllabic (rarely disyllabic) Sumerian words referring to the objects described, noting that in Sumerian a monosyllabic word ends in a consonant (ie CV-C)…. >>

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

<< Therefore, an adequate period of arrival of the first Sumerian settlers in Crete can be defined between 2800-2600 BC. ….                                                                                                      3.3.1. Migration routes                                                                                                                                   Genomic analysis of European populations and the associated development of dairy practices indicate that farmers in the Middle East gradually immigrated to Europe during the Neolithic, through Anatolia and Greece . This route has always been the closest to Europe, in any case of historical turmoil in the Middle East, obviously even today. 3.3.3. Trade routes … .. The distance from the northern Sumerian territories to the north coast of the Levant, traveling upstream of the Euphrates River, is only 800 km (the curious reader can easily check these routes using the ease of calculating the distance of a relevant program such as Google-Earth). This route was well known to the Mesopotamians, not only from the Uruk period, but even before it, during the Ubaid period. … …By 3000 BC, Sumer had been the center of a transactional “globalization.” The most important trade for Bronze Age technology was tin. There have been extensive trading networks for this purpose. Other minerals and materials such as amber were also imported and their trade routes extended from Scandinavia to Cyprus. Commercial activity in particular does not only include the exchange of goods, but also the exchange of information and possibly an exchange of delegations of experts or agents for the valuation of traded goods. 3.5. Anthropological evidence (Who they were) There have been various attempts by scientists from many disciplines (archeology; linguistics; anthropology) to identify the origins of the Minoans. Homer (Odyssey: XIX, 172-180) mentions at least five ethnic groups (or subethnic in the case of the Achaeans and Dorians), each speaking their own language or dialect, respectively (respectively, Ahei, Eteocretani, Kydonieni, Dorieni and Pelasgi). Herodotus (Ι.173.1) mentions that in ancient times the whole of Crete was inhabited by “barbarians”, clearly meaning “foreigners” (ie non-Greeks; not “barbarians” in modern meaning of “savages”). Owens argues for the national descent of the Minoan population in opposition to Duhoux, who cites Homer’s passage above to justify the multinational environment in Prehistoric chalk. Owens’s debate bases the population of Crete on the estimated date of the writing of the Odyssey (800 BC), which has indeed been described as multinational. This debate, however, explains only for Doric groups, the last to have lived on the island in ancient times (11th century BC). For the others, Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus have preserved ancient narratives about the Eteocretans (“true Cretans”), claiming that they were the oldest inhabitants of the island, in addition to a group of older and primitive people (“Idaean Dactyls”) and also , mentioning those groups that inhabited the island after them suggest among others that the Eteocretans were the Sumerian population, the Kydonians were Akkadian settlers and the Idaean Dactyls were the earlier Neolithic inhabitants of Crete. He also proposes a settlement of the Sumerians in large numbers starting with 3000 BC. 3.5.1. Mediterranean race The Bronze Age Crete had been inhabited by people of the Mediterranean race of Neolithic origin. The Mediterranean genotype is evident in a wider perimeter of the Aegean Sea: from Western Anatolia to southern Italy and from the Central Balkan Mountains to Crete. Two relevant versions have been recognized that can be roughly characterized as “Continental” and “island” (the latter are also found in the coastal areas of the Aegean Sea), both of which are distinct from the “Armenian type”.                      4.Discussion                                                                                                                                                 The entire linguistic context of Minoan (pre-Mycenaean) Crete seems to be closer to the Middle East than to mainland Greece, either in terms of the existence of multilingual societies or in terms of influence on script creation. It is estimated that the beginning of the creation of CH and LA is somewhere between 3000-2600 BC. This is exactly the crucial period of previously estimated socio-economic changes in Sumerian societies (see 3.1.4). Thus, we are looking for a period of Sumerian (proto) writing in which their writing system had become largely phonetic, but had not yet been developed in cuneiform (after 2600-2500 BC), although the transition from Sumerian script to curvilinearity proto-cuneiform had begun as early as the 30th century BC. At this stage, their original phonetic signs (about 600) could have been developed into another compact and light syllabic system, such as CP, but still without any influence or cuneiform trace. Moreover, the Sumerians of that period were not yet affected by sprachbund (Deutscher, 2007; Woods, 2006), namely Akkadian bilingualism, because CP is simply an evolution of the archaic Sumerian script, dating from 3100 to 2600 BC. .hr. Therefore, an adequate period of arrival of the first Sumerian settlers in Crete can be defined between 2800-2600 BC. To summarize the socio-economic evidence presented, in the 26th and 27th centuries BC, the Sumerians had the experience:

 urbanization and overcrowding (see 3.1.1);

 the need for raw materials necessary for their advanced civilization, but absent in Mesopotamia

 (due to the previous need) knowledge of an extensive commercial network that has been exploited, even long before this period

 socio-economic changes accompanied by an increase in war and poverty for the lower classes Therefore, in those times, the Sumerian socio-economic conditions were similar to those of the Greek city-states that triggered the Great Ancient Greek Colonization in the 8-6th centuries B.C.

To summarize the geographical evidence, it is shown that extensive networks have existed since the Neolithic era, especially in the Balkans, through which people, strategic raw materials, other goods and information traveled from Scandinavia in the north to Ethiopia in the south and from the British Isles in the west, India to the east, with the center of this network in Mesopotamia. The oldest direct evidence to date of such sea ​​voyages in the above-mentioned trade networks date back to about 1300 BC, from the famous Ulu-burun Shipwreck / Turkey containing 17 tons of materials from 11 different cultures, including amber from the Baltic countries and tin from Afghanistan. Crete had a nature and was a privileged natural and geographical place in the origin of the north-western routes of this network that could be favorable for the establishment of the people who knew them.                                                           5. Preliminary conclusion                                                                                                                        Given the local (Mediterranean) origins of the Minoan inhabitants that have been found so far (see 3.5.1), the initial proposal for the settlement of large Sumerian populations (Kenanidis and Papakitsos, 2013a) is not anthropologically supported, at least not in the sense that whole Sumerian families immigrated to Crete. Which could have happened, although it is analogous to the Great Ancient Greek Colonization, where the settlers were mostly unmarried men, who obtained brides from the local population after settlement (Manfredi and Braccesi, 1997). This analogy justifies the anthropological evidence about the Minoans in terms of both their maternal descent of Neolithic European origin (see 3.5.2) and the assimilation observed by the locals of the settlers in “Iranian / Armenian” (Kyriakidis and Konstas, 1974b). Ancient Greek settlers, although fewer in number, but carrying an advanced culture, influenced in many different ways by neighboring Romans (Manfredi and Braccesi, 1997) and Etruscans (Laparidou, 2002), or other indigenous populations, from the Egyptians (Trianti et al., 2011) to the distant culture of Gandara in Eastern Afghanistan. Therefore, SOT, as expressed here, argues that the eastern settlers who arrived in Crete during the 28th-26th centuries BC. (Douvitsas, 2005; Kyriakidis, 1971; Kyriakidis and Konstas, 1974b) were people from the Sumerian cultural environment: merchants (knowledge of routes), craftsmen (carpenters, metallurgists, seal makers, etc.) and scholars (actually accountants and administration officials). ) in moderate numbers. The advanced level of this civilization compared to that of the local Neolithic population could easily have led to the complete adoption of their culture by the locals, during the period of eight centuries (2700-1900 BC). Prepalatial. In this regard, more direct evidence is accumulating that will be presented shortly. The inscriptions Linear B cover approximately the postpalatal period. By using the rebus principle, it has been shown beyond any statistical doubt that the language that creates Linear B signs (consisting of abstractly described objects) is a close dialect, but simpler than the archaic Sumerian, because the phonetic value of each sign corresponds to the equivalent Sumerian monosyllabic word. for the described object. According to Fischer (2004), the principle of conundrum that was invented by the Sumerians is a gift to mankind, whose linguistic influence has spread to Iran, the Nile, the Indus Valley and (perhaps) the Balkans (Kenanidis, 1992). CV CV-type phonotactics is usually found in agglutinative languages, a feature that was ignored in LA, although observed very early by Duhoux (1998) and recently by Davis (2014) as well. A nearby agglutinative language so well studied from the third millennium BC. she was Sumerian. … According to CP theory, Sumerian scholars, who invented the original script, had to write in languages ​​other than their own mother tongue, from which you can deduce that all “non-Minoan” languages ​​written in LA / LB are quite distorted. >>

Cretan Hieroglyphics The Ornamental and Ritual Version of the Cretan Protolinear Script (PDF) Cretan Hieroglyphics: The Ornamental and Ritual… http://www.researchgate.net ›publication› 312039048_Cretan  << The Cretan hieroglyphic script is conventionally classified as one of the five scriptures in the Aegean Sea, together with Linear-A, Linear-B and the two Cypriot syllables, namely Cyprus-Minoan and the Greek Cypriot syllable, the latter being considered as such due to pictorial and phonetic similarities with the previous ones . Cretan hieroglyphs were found in the Aegean Sea area in the second millennium BC. Their relationship with Linear-A is still in dispute, while the language (or languages) transmitted is still considered unknown. The authors argue here that the Cretan hieroglyphic script is simply a decorative version of the Linear-A (or, more precisely, the lost Cretan protolinear script that is the ancestor of all Aegean scriptures) that was used primarily by seal makers or used for rituals. The language transmitted must be a conservative form of Sumerian, as the Cretan hieroglyph is strictly associated with the main original Minoan culture and religion – unlike Linear-A which was used for several other languages ​​– while the phonetic values ​​of the signs have the same Sumerian origin as in Proto-Cretan . … .. ……It was documented that the inventors of the Proto-Linear Script were a nation that spoke a dialect close to the archaic Sumerian language. …… ……The following year, Duhoux (1978) observed that Linear-A is “rather agglutinative than inflected ”(same as the Sumerian language), due to the large number of affixes it contains (in 59% of words) compared to Linear-B (respectively 12%). … There are also older indications of different schools / scribal styles (Bennett 1966). Later, this suggestion was also supported by Finkelberg (1998). This idea (scribal guild), extended in the past, can explain why and how a relatively limited number of Sumerian scribes and seal makers could have created a writing system (Cretan Protolinear, so Linear-A, Cretan Hieroglyphics and Linear-B) to write the different languages ​​of the Aegean Sea (Kenanidis and Papakitsos 2015a). These professionals could easily have been hired from the Sumerian communities in the Levant (according to Rohl 1999). … ….After an idea from 1978 and almost 10 years of research, Kenanidis (1992) published (in modern Greek) a study that links the phonetic values ​​of the syllabograms of the linear scriptures to the common or culturally important words of the archaic Sumerian language, through through the rebus principle. This study refers extensively to the Cretan Proto-Linear script, considering as the only preserved samples of it three inscriptions on:……. ……Nota: tablitele de la Tartaria par a fi cea mai buna exemplificare, pentru Scriptura Proto-Lineara, daca nu cumva pentru o faza extrem de incipienta.                                                                            

“PICTOGRAPHIC” TABLET

 Image from http://www.dacoromania-alba.ro/nr27/cultura_si_civilizatiile_la_tartaria.htm

Among the Aegean writings, this tablet certainly leans towards the Cretan Hieroglyphic writing, which uses pictograms extensively. That kind of writing was used to inscribe votive (cultic) objects and seals.                                                                          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~                                                                                 subject to comparison. (-> -> ->). – one /

FIRST,LEFT-SIDE SIGN, ….a human silhouette? spirit/gost, master of animals, deity? ( Pity, the talent did not help the scribe at all) is not present in any of the writings (Sumerian, Aegean). Obviously, it is not found among the Aegean signs, because we do not even know what to look for. and, VEGETAL TWIG,BRANCH,GRAIN EAR Sumerians had many signs for different kind of cereals: As, Se, Se x Se Minoans had the twig> Cretan sign Te: “wheat” image, from https://linearbknossosmycenae.com Cretan hieroglyphs dealing with crops and vessels pottery

– that GOAT (s) was represented in the Aegean writings. The tablet seems to present a ritual of offering an offering (goat / goats) and maybe also cereals = “straw”. https://swaggert727344314.wordpress.com/2019/03/26/the-journey-begins/ Mountain Goat = Ibex (in Crete: “cri-cri”)

Din http://oldeuropeanculture.blogspot.com/2020/02/goat-riding-thunder-god.html

These plaques are dated to Late Minoan I period (1480BC-1425BC) are from “Minoan Goat Hunting: Social Status and the Economics of War” by Angela Murock Hussein. That unclear undefined shaped silhuette could be of that one wich made the animal sacrifice (or the deity wich receive the sacrificed animal?) Rezult: 1 unknown sign in Aegean writings . 1 sign identical with the Aegean sign (Te), 1 wich have close shape corespondence in Aegean scripts.(goat)

RECTANGULAR DRILLED TABLET

From  Promotora Española de Lingüística – Escritura de Tartaria

Contains about 8 signs. In the extreme part – upper middle: three signs like >>> We have mainly from left to right in the sea, 4 columns.                                                                                                 FIRST COLUMN It has three cassettes. Starting with the top (and going down):                                 –3 SIGNS “DDD-like” or “>>>”                                                                                                              Image, http://ancientlights.org/CalendarHouse/ch2.html

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/4uNPm9lq2U0zVE3RR4fqSvr3_qaZclj38zuJX4HSCRvnR1jBM7AhWmWO2cbCx3ySG3c67o5uAi2fsv_xE1K6Xx8hSmfTmevRcCTNPoqC2mxn9a2OHq0

Aegean equivalent http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 * 34 sign “C”

“Sign * 034 has been suggested by several scholars to represent MNA (or, if a disyllabic value can be accepted, MINA), based on its resemblance to the crescent moon” “hiru”? “3 months” ?? – Then follows, below, one (or maybe 2?):

 VEGETALE SIGNS like “branch” (one above the other). It has (have) a correspondent in the Aegean plant signs for example the sign “you”. 1.https://linearbknossosmycenae.com Te:”wheat” 2.http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 * 04 (TE) “TE, 1.“ from ../ of .. ”? 3. likely “expected evaluations or contributions”

Result, vegetable-cereal signs. Aegean sign “te” (very possible te-te) Documents in Minoan, Luwian, Semitic and Pelasgianwww.talanta.nl ›wp-content› uploads ›2014/08› 2016… PDF << te-te te-na-te “ au dat lui Tanit ”>> 21 Compiled Syllabaries of Old European – Migration & Diffusionmigration-diffusion.info› pdfdownload PDFnurnber of related scripts were translated, regards with Minoan Linear A and ending with Russell. Burrows cave in… TE-TE he made, the way. TE-TO nothing. CONCLUSION According to my knowledge and perception, we actually have 2 signs “Te” there, Te-Te: “(opened) the way, they gave” but I choose Te x Te:”cereals>WHEAT“

– Going down, follow the second box located in the first column on the left.                                    Y-like SIGN. I found the “Y” sign in exactly the same way among the Aegean signs in the Faistos disc. http://www.deniart.com/phaistos.shtml http://www.deniart.com/gfx/phaistossampler.gif

Looks like “Yes” http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 * 01

and / or with the sign “Sa” http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 * 31

“SA, perhaps a logogram for * SA-SA-ME?” <SA (HT 114b.1) or SI (HT 30.1) = paid? > I am inclined for the Aegean sign “Yes” although ours is sinistrovers (pointing to the left) and the Aegean sign is dextrovers. I have no other solution than to assume an inability to retain the scribe.

http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 << DA-I = “total” ?: HT 12.6 (Schoep 2002, 162); cf. DA-I-PI-TA, ZA 8.5. If DA– (as in DA-DU-MA-TA) indicates in some way a completed action (like a perfect of A-DU), could DA-I be a completed transaction * 516 I + [?] >>

I found it in both left / right variants on the Arkalochori ax and both variants were interpreted by andras Zeke as representing the syllabogram “Yes”: A marvel of Minoan finds: the double-axis of Arkalochori http://minoablog.blogspot.com /2010/03/marvel-of-minoan-finds-axe-of.html https://medium.com/@mwenge/i-da-ma-te-in-the-arkalochori-axe-44f935f03f6e

CONCLUZION: sign is syllabogram “DA” and signify “completed, given“

• – Following 3-rd and last cassette of the first column.
• Sign  “ligaturate TRAPEZES ”.                                                                               Sign very problematic and difficult, because there is not found in Aegean scripts. 
• http://www.oocities.org/proto-language/SumerianSignValueRegister.htm ga2, 458

• http://www.oocities.org/proto-language/ProtoLanguage-Monosyllables.htm

• << K?AThe 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’.>>
• is.muni.cz › PAPVB_13 › Gl…PDF a gal[help]; a gal[strong]; a gar[defeat] – IS MUNI 1. cella 2. bedroom 3. a ritual building 4. the sanctuary … Akk. damšillu “(a kind of cucumber )?; plant name” … GA2: ga2. 1. house 2. station (of the moon)? 3. room 4. house-lot. 5. estate.
• Somehow alike sign 002 (as on CHIC #328) from Cretan Hieroglyphic http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/PHDisc/PHDiscSigns.html

Damn! In In the land of Lilliput: writing in the Bronze Age Aegean by Artemis Karnava says that Cr.Hier. 002 would be “human bust”; The same goes for John Younger http://www.people.ku.edu/~jyounger/Hiero/Hgrids.html

002 = VIR2 (“male”) or 004: “female”? ..It could be because the upper part is smaller than the lower one, almost like the Aegean sign. It most resembles a Sumerian sign “AB” = “house, temple”. https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/signlists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html “AB”

Ancient writing in Mesopotamia (Chapter …cambridge.org

Then it resembles https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html the Sumerian sign ZAG: “metal shine, domain, border, district” “

and also resembles GA’AR, GAR: “all barley products”

From the same source, UNUG: “Temple”

Used by the Sumerians to write “eš3”. A.A. Vaiman could not identify him with a Sumerian sign, but he shows the closest sign after the dance, “AB” http://www.archeo.ru/izdaniya-1/archaeological-news/arheologicheskie-vesti/AV_03.pdf

Possible equivalent: 1. ‘labrys” https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkalochori_Axe

http://www.researchgate.net Diachronic change in sign forms between Archanes Script and Cretan-Hieroglyphic or from Archanes Script… onlinelibrary.wiley.com

It’s not labrys because our sign doesn’t have the handle! 2. B / 16/165; B / 16/167 ‘lingou’. From History Of Copper https://www.copper.co.za/education/history-of-copper/

A corroded copper ingot from Zakros, Crete, shaped in the form of an animal skin typical in that era. Folowing image, from: Bilingual Indus Script inscriptions, evidence … – Bharatkalyan97 bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com › 2019/09 › bilingual-in.

For now, I give equal chances for the “ingot” and for the symbol “place / sacred temple”. Towards the conclusion: Present sacred sign, it seems with origins in Neolithic, Anatolia and Vinca Civilization.

T h e G r e a t S c h o l a r M A R I J A G I M B U T A S http://mmstudies.com/scholars/gimbutas/

This symbol painted on a vase from the Cucuteni culture in north east Romania 4000 BC is, according to Marija Gimbutas, definitely the symbol of the Goddess of regeneration in the form of a double triangle shaped like an hourglass. ”

Unlike the Sumerians who had a complex social and religious stratification and who had signs for the Ab and Unug temple, the Minoans held rituals in nature, on mountain tops and in caves, as such they had no specific sign for the temple.

wikipedia Minoan religion <<… there is no evidence that Minoan religious practice was centered around formal public temples. Some scholars see the Minoan Goddess as a divine female solar figure. >>

See A-sa-sa-ra <> Asherah? Linguistic Evidence for a Phoenician Pillar Cult in Crete janes.scholasticahq.com ›article PDF

They had only signs associated with the sacred and goddess the chthonic mother, Ma and the astral Asasara. Sign found in the labrys sign found in the places and caves where the rituals were held. Sign associated with the temple / labyrinth, “da-pu-ri-to-yo Po-ti-ni-ya”. Used in places of worship of the mother goddess IDA (IDA-MATER), mistress. “That of Mount Dikte” (A-DI-KI-TE PO-TI-NI-JA) http://www.melampus.name/war-of-the-gods—minoan-mycenaean.html http: // http://www.melampus.name/uploads/8/3/2/1/8321682/c10_orig.jpg The Goddess as “Mistress of the animals” surmounted by a double-axis icon in an epiclesis.

Ooops! https://medium.com/@mwenge/i-da-ma-te-in-the-arkalochori-axe-44f935f03f6e

A marvel of Minoan finds: the double-ax of Arkalochori http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/03/marvel-of-minoan-finds-axe-of.html The ‘i’ vowel may be either part of the stem or a separate deictic particle (if I-DA-MA-TE is the same as DA-MA-TE, on KY Za 2). As for me, I suspect that this stem is originally without i- and it means ‘sanctuary’

Proposed conclusion: the sign represents (I) DA-MA-te: “SANCTUARY” or…

Anistoriton Journal, Vol 15 (2016-2017) In Situ 1 A 17th v. BC Minoan Votive Double Axis (Labrys)

The Arkalochori Ax and its siblings http://www.anistor.gr/english/enback/2016_1s_Anistoriton.pdf

Rather, a name as “damat” in Sumerian must be connected to the Sumerian “DAM” (husband), through which many Sumerian divine names began. …. DAM ”can mean“ husband ”and then“ year ”should be AN, the supreme god of the Sumerians, especially important in the city of Uruk and Crete which was colonized when Uruk was the dominant city of Sumer. …. Analogous is the inscription “nodamat” on small axes, of gold and silver: NO (hand) DAM (of the wife) of A (N) The supreme god TE the almighty (?). Here the two aspects of the divine are mentioned as DAM (feminine aspect, “yin”) and AN (masculine aspect, “yang”). >> eugenrau: … Somehow also there: sign <associated> with the wife of the supreme god

Otherwise tho proto-cuneiform sign DAM is https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html

Similar Aegean sign 004: “FEM” (female / female) but not any woman but: DAM-A “WIFE OF THE SUPREME GOD” (? The forerunner of Damater, Hera and Diona?) ??… very very difficult, I choose:

CONCLUSION: Although in our thablet the upper trapezoid is bigger, and not as in the similar signs sum.AB: “house, temple” and UNUG: “temple”, I say that it is the Aegean sign DA-MA–TE: “OF THE DAMA/MOTHER,WIFE-SPOUSE” “SANCTUARY“. Being isolated it has the meaning of sanctuary in general.

On two Aegean signs and their pairs in sumerian proto-cuneiform. https://tartariatablets.com/2020/02/12/on-twoo-proto-cuneiform-and-paired-aegean-signs/

Patrick C. Ryan “Proto-Language” sumerian sign GA2                                                                                                            From Archaeology of Food: An Encyclopedia Karen Bescherer Metheny, ‎Mary C. Beaudry file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/Vessels_and_other_containers_for_the_sto.pdf                        “This frame or container sign is reletad to a symilar basket or box, namely the sign GA2”  From Sumerian Archaic Sign Table Patrick C. Ryan https://www.oocities.org/proto-language/SumerianSignValueRegister.htm                                                                                  “All available readings for Sumerian signs in Kurt Jaritz’ Schriftarchäologie der altmesopotamischen Kultur⁽¹⁾ (1967) have been listed in the Sumerian Sign Value Register. The sign numbers are those of Jaritz’ Schriftarchäologie der altmesopotamischen Kultur (1967)” Sign No. 458

From  https://www.sumerian.org/sumerian.pdf                                                                              << ” GA (pronounced nga,ñá): basket; HOUSE; stable (cf., ñar) [GA2 archaic frequency: 125; concatenation of 5 sign variants].GA (nga,ñá): (cf., ñál, ñar, ñe26 and ma(3)) >>

SECOND COLUMN – THE SIGN “INSECT?” Sign v.problematic & difficult. A.A. Vaiman did not find the Sumerian proto-cuneiform equivalent, see the dance table: “signs No.4 (its meaning is unknown)” I did not find him identical in the Sumerian signs, only close ?. https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html “AN” (An, Anu, “the heavenly god”)

I did not find it identical in the Aegean writings. It resembles the hieroglyphic Cretan sign 068. Then it resembles, (but ours has 12 “rays”), and the 8-ray sign http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 * 44 (KE )

1.Symbol of “deity”? or symbol 2.‘consonant “Ke“ ?. Similar to the sign http://www.kairatos.com.gr/linear1.htm “Do / Du” That is, it resembles the sign below, interpreted here 3. “Zu” From https://linearbknossosmycenae.com/tag/cretan- hieroglyphics /

ZU:? A kind of harvest of (cereals)?

Here it appears as meaning Do or Du: http://www.kairatos.com.gr/linear1.htm

From http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2009/ << This exclusion rule can be applied to the Linear A sign * 79 (‘eye’) to show why it cannot represent the value ‘ZU’ (that was assigned to it by John Younger et al.). The case-ruling example we find on the tablet ZA4, row a.5 where the term QE-SI- * 79-E can be read. The same name recurs on tablet ZA15. Now, if the reading of * 79 were ‘ZU’, we would rather expect an ending ZU-WE (with a not well characterized linear A WE sign) and NOT ZU-E. On the other hand, the value suggested and used by many (e.g. Glen Gordon) for this linear A sign: ‘DO’, fits perfectly, as DO-E is absolutely possible. But the case of LinA * 79 has to approached with care. Apparently, there are two distinct LinearB signs (* 79 and * 14) corresponding to single cluster (* 79) Linear A. I label it as a cluster, as it contains signs of very variable design: it is easily possible that there are two signs lumped into a single cluster: at least one of these is (with resonably high probability) is the Linear A counterpart of Linear B ‘DO’ sign (Lin.B * 14). >>

CONCLUSION: Maybe risk, and although I have the highest respect for Mr. Andras Zeke

(Minoan language blog http://minoablog.blogspot.com/) and dance research, without any argument, however my option (as a novel !?) is for the meaning: “Zu” Hypothesis: Even in Romanian there is a connection between light and eyes; their faculty = “light of the eyes” Starting from the root I.E. for the light “Di” we reach Ziu, Zou, Zu, Zoia. See the Cretan locality “Zou to lako”

The Proto-Sumerian Language Invention Process by John A. Halloran https://www.sumerian.org/prot-sum.htm << zu, sú: n., wisdom, knowledge; v. to know, to understand, to inform, teach (in marû reduplicated form); to learn from someone (with -da-); to recognize someone (with -da-); to be experienced, qualified.>>

v., to know; to understand; to inform, teach (in marû reduplicated form); to learn from someone (with -da-); to recognize someone (with -da-); to be experienced, qualified

CONCLUSION: “Zu =“ Zou, ZEitate ”(the graphic equivalent of the Sumerian sign AN)

3rd COLUMN – THE SIGN“ CAP-de-ASS ”. It appears for the first time in the Sumerians, the sign having the name AMAR and the meaning “calf”, this being a solar symbol for them. https://cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/protocuneiform/archsigns.html AMAR

– Wiktionaryen.wiktionary.org ›wiki (būru) [AMAR]. calf. Derived termsEdit · 𒀭𒀫𒌓 (dAMAR.UTU, “Marduk”). SumerianEdit. NounEdit. 𒀫 (LOVE). calf · young, youngster, chick · son, descendant.

Found very similar in the Aegean writings. image from: CREWS Project – WordPress.com Cats in the Aegean Scripts

On the iconicity of Greek Mycenaean MA-KA

Maria Mertzani periodicos.unipampa.edu.br [PDF] 117-Text of article-201-1-10-20190715

V1.COMPARATIVE ENCYCLOPEDIC DICTIONARY OF MESOPOTAMIAN… books.google.com ›books Ama – Amar… Ama: Sumerian. Noun. Mother. Ima in Hebrew. Ama in ancient Syriac.

the Sumerian sign aMAr became the Minoan sign MA;

A 17th c. BC Minoan Votive Double Ax http://www.anistor.gr ›english› enback http://www.anistor.gr/english/enback/2016_1s_Anistoriton.pdf Ioannis K. Kenanidis, Ptychion (Philology / Linguist. ) Primary Education Directorate of Kavala.

<< 3 and 11: the well-known sign for ‘ma’, which describes the face of a calf (calf = amá (r) in

Sumerian); not the face of a cat as scholars are accustomed to. Indeed, the people of the cities are today

only familiar with cats and not with calves and even in ancient times there was a

reminiscent of a cat’s face (judging by the hieroglyphic seal [APPENDIX]), but

Sumerian-speaking users were aware that this described a calf. This is why the sign is without a mustache (even on the hieroglyphic seal [APPENDIX]). Also, the sign here doesn’t have it

human neck and ears of the human face of the ‘qa’ sign …… I saw this type of spelling in the inscription ‘a ma deŋejŋo’ (discussed in the ANNEX below) where the sign of the calf’s face (‘amá (r)’) was taken to involve “ama” (mother) and not “ma” as usual, even if the sign did not mean “calf” (“amá (r)”), but the homophone “ama” (“mother”). ). >>

CONCLUSION: “MA sign: meaning” MOTHER, MOTHER “(GODDESS-MOTHER)”

4th and LAST COLUMN Contains two signs starting from top to bottom:

-sign “(BULL-HEAD) -TAURUS”.                                                                                                                 About this sign No.14 ,, A.A. Vaiman did not enter anything in the table and otherwise only refers to it without proposing what it is: “V. The column is not divided into lines and does not contain numbers. There are two (or three?) Signs, no. 14 and 10 (fig.4), the latter being the same as the one that appears in line II 2. Not found exactly in this form in the Aegean script, but in an extremely similar form. The appearance and the realization on the tablet leave much to be desired. http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 Hieroglyphic * 012

a bull-head, becomes Linear AB 23 MU

SA / 6/113. it is very similar to the Aegean sign H / 12/21 “Mu” (see the eye in the head!). It resembles The Cretan Hieroglyphic table of signs, as suggested in the corpus inscriptions (Olivier and Godart 1996, 17). no.012 Conclusion: MU: “TAURUS” Note. If we take that rod shape that represents Cretan Hieroglyphic “U” would result Mu-U = MUU

-sign “BINDED TRAPEZES” Identical to the previous one, but I would like to return A.A. Vaiman could not identify him, (as can be seen in the dance table posted above AAVaiman’s table, from http://www.archeo.ru/izdaniya-1/archaeological-news/arheologicheskie-vesti/AV_03.pdf), although it shows that the closest Sumerian sign would be AB: “house, TEMPLE”. The strongest and oldest model for this form is the constellation Orion. Thus it becomes the oldest possible association. https://www.freepik.com/premium-vector/orion-constellation-illustration-scheme-constellation-stars-with-its-name_8027372.htm

Orion Constellation Myths of Sumer, Babylon and Egypt http://www.astronomytrek.com/orion-constellation-myths-of-sumer-babylon-and-egypt/ << For this urban civilization, the constellation represented its hero Gilgamesh, whose exploits were immortalized in the first piece of surviving heroic literature called The Epic of Gilgamesh. …. The Sumerians later honored the battle by presenting Gilgamesh in the celestial heavens as the constellation URU AN-NA (“light of heaven”) fighting a bull, identified as the modern constellation near Taurus. >>… from here, from the house, in fact the “living room”, comes the symbol of the temple of the supreme celestial deity, whatever it may be in different civilizations.

Bull of Heaven Heavenly Taurus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bull_of_Heaven <Some researchers consider the Bull of Heaven the same figure as Gugalanna, the husband of Ereshkigal mentioned by Inanna in the Descent of Inana into the underworld>

ANUjpreporter.net ›… <The Sumerian god Enki looks more like the serpent of Genesis and… Gud Anu Gud (Taurus) from Anu (Heaven / Universe). >>Bull of Heaven in Mesopotamian Sources – Culture and Cosmoswww.cultureandcosmos.org ›pdfs› 5-2-Soltysiak_Bull… PDF <The second constellation named after a bull is the Sumerian gud.an.na “bull of heaven”, equivalent to the Akkadian elu . In lexical texts it is separate ..>

Bull of Heaven in Mesopotamian Sources – Culture and Cosmoswww.cultureandcosmos.org ›pdfs› 5-2-Soltysiak_Bull… PDF <The second constellation named after a bull is the Sumerian gud.an.na ‘bull… and after a gap Inanna asks Taurus Cerului (gud.an.na)> eugenrau: Gud-anu <?> GUDEANU

CONCLUSION II: THE DWELLING, THE RESIDENCE OF THE SUPREME HEAVENITYNOW WE ARE “OBLIGED” TO INTERPRET THE ENTIRE COLUMN

For the simple reason that here the symbols are not separated by any line or box and have a meaning taken together. But on this occasion we encountered a great difficulty, as the final significance of these symbols is not certain. We have some presumptive combinations: the upper symbol: Heavenly Taurus / Sun or Asterios / Minotaur / Moon. The lower symbol: The Sun Goddess, the Sun Goddess or the symbol the wife of the supreme heavenly god

The celestial bull + his consort or Taurus / Minotaur / Moon + the sun (solar goddess) or the celestial TAURUS / supreme deity / THE SUN + his house, his TEMPLE, Orion >> CONCLUSION: THE TEMPLE OF THE HEAVENLY TAURUS, (THE SUN)

Statistics: Out of 8 signs, 2 are not found among the Aegean signs, 2 in identical form and 4 in close form.                                                                                                                                       =========== ROUND PERFORATED TABLET  ===========                                                           Picture from http://www.dacoromania-alba.ro/nr27/cultura_si_civilizatorii_la_tartaria.htm

Circle divided into 4 quarters by a cross; we will take the quarters clockwise, the first located left-top:                                                                                                                                                            1-st QUARTER                                                                                                                                               Contains two signs: The sign “H with 3 horizontal bars/archaic eta-like”. There is somehow similar to the Sumerian sign proto-cuneiform Ku / Ga2, proto-Sinaitic Het, archaic Greek Heta, but also in Indus Script https://www.boloji.com/articles/11693/origin-and-etymology-of-the- valuations 12. <Sign

: This sign is like a cradle which locally is called ‘dollar’ or ‘dolna’. The first letter of this word is ‘da’. The method of acrology is also applicable here.>

There is identical in the inventory of Aegean signs, the sign PA3 (PA, PAI) http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22

Mycenaean | Minoan Linear A, Linear B, Knossos & Mycenae | Page 6linearbknossosmycenae.wordpress.com ›tag› page ›f… Next comes the supersyllabogram PA3 (PAI), 1.“ which probably refers to pa3ni / pa3nina / pa3niwi ”sau 2.” probably expected assessments or contributions ”“ PA3 appears on HT 9b, listing payments….

B / 17 / – “bronz” http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 AES bronze / copper: * 140

and A / 9/56, the “Pa3” sign It is not the bronze / copper sign because it has a short vertical bar on the right! The P? / D? As such there is no P at all and “D” only horizontally for volumetric measures, B / 15/110 “unit of volumetric measure”. : //linearbknossosmycenae.com/2016/09/29/measurement-of-17-conjectural-units-total-of-dry-and-liquid-volume-weight-in-minoan-linear-a/

In our country, the sign is not “blid” but is rotated 90gr beforehand. Or can the sign be 2. Symbol “moon” (as time)? https://linearbknossosmycenae.com/category/lessons-linear-b/

Otherwise it was returned to the Minoans: http://ancientlights.org/CalendarHouse/ch2.html

Interpreters: 1. PAI-MENO / PAIMEN> Poimen “pastor” https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/peh₂- << Semantic shift from “protector” towards “shepherd, herder” can be seen in many branches, signifying the importance of herding. Unusual is the o-grade root in Greek ποιμήν (poimḗn, “shepherd, herdsman”), >> 2. PAMENOS Tradition and Transformation. Egypt under Roman Rule:… Recent research seriously doubts the sibling marriages in Roman Egypt, suggesting… of Apollonia alias Senmonthis, daughter of Ptolemaios alias Pamenos.

From ANISTORITON Journal of History, Archeology, ArtHistory: Viewpoints http: //www.a nistor.gr/english/enback/v053.htm One of the faces reads: Pa – me-ni po-lo 100 The foals (polo (i) ) for this year (pameni has the dative ending, but cf. Greek pammenos) Please also note that the… 3.signs PA- Moon> PA – MENI: ”ALL- MONTHs = (this) YEAR !! Rom. ”(Aquest) an” Wikipedia, Minoan Molds of Palaikastro

So it would be added +++++ 5 days. It could be a lunar solar calendar, each quarter containing 3 months of 30 days and every year should be added +++++ 5 days. SFERTUL 2 contains:

-SIGN  +++++.

 It can represent the Aegean equivalents: 1. Number 15 Linear B decipherment: Linear B decipherment: credit where credit is due | dr dud’s dicta

2. “TE, 1.“ from ../ al .. ”3.Bindings of two signs A / 9/92“ Te ”A / 9/92 or A / 9/61“ Ne ”.So possible“ te- you ”=” did, the way ”? 3. Number “50”

–Two “D” signs Not existing in Sumerian proto-writing, the oldest occurrence is in the Old Elamite 2250 and 2220 IEN (see “u”, “ku”) https://omniglot.com/writing/elamite.htm A selection of Old Elamite symbols which have been deciphered:

LINEAR ELAMITE WRITING François Desset http://www.researchgate.net List of accepted values ​​for LE signs identifications in the right column are uncertain The following is not good, it contains two signs in the mirror

Indus script sign “Dha” https://www.boloji.com/articles/10657/a-new-light-on-the-decipherment-of

Origin and Etymology of the Valuations of Indus-Saraswati Signs by Rajat K Pal https://www.boloji.com/articles/11693/origin-and-etymology-of-the-valuations

Sign

The valuation of this sign is ‘da’ / ‘dha’. The origin of this sign is the word ‘dhanuka’ which means bow with or without arrow. Through acrology the first letter ‘dha’ became the valuation of that sign.

It does not exist identically in the Aegean writings, only in the mirror http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 L (A709) “value is unknown”

1.Volumetric unit / cereal-straw portion https://linearbknossosmycenae.com/2015/02/19/mycenaean-linear-b-units-of-measurement-liquid-dry-weight-click-to-enlarge/

Here we have a very big problem; the volume sign should be rotated 90gr counterclockwise. To the Sumerians the similar sign GAR (a D with an inner parallel line) reads ninda was initially in the plate dish- (horizontal) position, then they rotated it. Introduction Into the First Society – ppt download

Attention: The first “D” sign seems to contain the sign http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 * 37 (TI)

2.TE / TI, << “from / of” (Valério 2007), associated with agricultural products and people, usually in large quantities. So, assessments… >> engl. “From, of”, “evaluations”

– two “O” signs or “oc” signs

1. The “o” sign found identically in The Cretan Hieroglyphic table of signs, as suggested in the corpus inscriptions (Olivier and Godart 1996, 17 ) sign no.073. Then in Linear A http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 * 309 “shape O”

 In http://www.kairatos.com.gr/linear1.htm the sign “Qe”? Two Aegean signs of 100, so “200” from Cretan Hieroglyphs Numerals: A Brief Information |

 “oc” signs = Two phases of the four of the moon? The “C” sign has the equivalent H / 13/65 MINA or B / 15 / * 34 “month’s ration?”                                                                                          ALTHOUGH I COULD INTERPRET LIKE SUMERIANS, who obtained these signs by pressing, WHERE DDOO = 1, 1, 10, 10, cereal portions, I MEAN TO USE THE FACT THAT IN MINOIC “D” REPRESENTS THE UNIT OF MEASUREMENT VOLUME (LIKE THE BLENDER) AND THAT I COULD INTERPRET THE SIGNS “OO” AS “100 100”,                                                                                                I WILL NOT PROCEED LIKE THIS, BECAUSE THE RECTANGULAR TABLE COVERED EXACTLY THE HALF HALF OF THE ROUND ONE WHEN THE TABLETS ARE CARRIED TOGETHER, TOGETHER AND TOGETHER ESOTERIC MEANING OF THESE SEQUENCES “HD DDoc” and the interpretation will be:

HD = PA-MENI = ”all months” = ”YEAR” and DDOC are THE PHASES OF THE MOON.

QUADRANT 3 contains the signs:

(image from Moonlight in Romania…) I could have read each sign separately considering that each is composed of elementary signs joined by ligature / connection. But you will see further (more obvious to you and easy to understand) by exemplifying the 2nd sign. that the signs are complex ideograms. – THE LEFT SIGN. A complex ideogram, an altar-like sign (with flame), but rather a “portable altar.” I did not find it identical in the Aegean inventory. It has an Aegean equivalent that is not identical, it looks like the “De” sign turned upside down! http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/PHDisc/PHDiscSigns.html

It is worth noting that this sign was proposed by Maria Gimbutas or Cosmas Theodorides e, Tanit. I didn’t find it exactly so representing “E” in the Vinca-Turdas civilization! http://studialphabetica.blogspot.com/2014/11/?m=0

CONCLUSION: Religious ritual sign “(portable)Altar“

THE SIGN ON HIS RIGHT: Another complex ideogram is not found in the identical form among the Aegean signs. It resembles the Larsa city seal, in fact the altar of the temple of the Sumerian deity Samas (the sun) in Larsa. http://enenuru.net/html/misc/cityseals.htm

The sign also resembles the icon of the goddess Punic Tanit. http://studialphabetica.blogspot.com/2014/11/?m= https://ro.pinterest.com/pin/726064771152145821/

Ritual and Worship at Knossos (Minoan Bronze Age) kzclip.com ›video› ritual-and-worship-at-knossos-mi… disk the words A-TA-I-WE-WA-JA or JA-SA-SA-RA -ME mean Asasara / Ishassara which is the goddess Astarte. M “Minoan Kingship and the Solar Goddess“

By the way, talking of sacrifice ritual, note that the tablet is shaped as a little loaf of bread,cake, bun-shaped… Imprints of the Neolithic mind — clay stamps from the Republic of Macedonia https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239927120_Imprints_of_the_Neolithic_mind_-_clay_stamps_from_the_Republic_of_Macedonia

From Those “bloody” Minoans… by Andras Zeke/Hu http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/ <<And thus we have arrived to the point to discuss a second theory about the meaning of A-SA-SA-RA-ME. It will be more in-line with the contemporary Minoan customs, but probably less pleasing to a faint-hearted reader. This possible explanation would be to compare A-SA-SA-RA-ME with the hieroglyphic Luwian word asḫarmis (plural: a-sa-ḫa+ra-mi-sa) = ‘offering’, ‘sacrifice‘ (or similar). Hittitologists tend to connect this word with Luwian asḫar- = ‘blood’, thus *asḫar-m-is- originally meaning ‘bloody sacrifice’. Whatever its orginal etymology was, it was used in a bit more generic sense in the Karkamiš inscriptions, since at least one of its mentions (see the figure) also involves sacrifice of bread, not just animals. Given the number of phrases in Minoan with possible Anatolian cognates, we should not be surprised to see yet another one added to the list. While the gemination of SA syllables is definitely problematic in Minoan (we must assume a development *-asḫa- → *-asaḫa- → *-asasa- upon borrowing – as Minoan might not have had the consonant ḫ) and its stem-ending is different, a generic meaning ‘sacrifice’ would fit exceptionally well with *A-SA-SA-RA-M-. Should this identification be true, A-SA-SA-RA-ME could mean ‘of sacrifice‘ and conversely A-SA-SA-RA-MA-NA ‘sacrificial’. This could easily explain the universal use of these terms in religious contexts.>>

CONCLUSION: Aegean female astral deity “A-Sa-Sa-Ra” Conclusion / Interpretation: goddess “Asasara”

QUARTER 4,                                                                                                                                              Contains the following signs taken clockwise starting with the one on the top left:                                -the “BOW-and-ARROW” sign

 Identical found in the Christian Hieroglyphic Writing sign 048. http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/PHDisc/PHDiscSigns.html

Otherwise, in the Sumerian proto-cuneiform signs (sign Ba) and in the Anatolian alphabets (Carian: “i”). https://sites.google.com/site/collesseum/cretanscripts#_ftn1 << TO (P48, AB5, CC13 78, C TO) is a bow (toxon) with an arrow, but the curve was straightened, and the string was reduced to a small stroke …….

TO to(xos): bow (with arrow)

(PD11) PG48 LA39 L (A) B5 LC to CC8b, 9?

My suggestion is that the Linear A and B sign ultimately derives from a picture of a bow and arrow, Greek toxon.The Phaistos Disk glyph (PD 11, 1x) is a bow.Pictophonograph 48 (likewise one example only) is apparently a bow and arrow (though it might be a bird with a long neck, hence LA / B KU ?!). If neither of these pictographs are connected with toxon (bow), then my case for LA / B TO is difficult to argue.Nevertheless , the LB form could be a reduction of an original drawing of a bow and arrow: two parallel horizontal lines represent the bow, while the arrow is the vertical line below them and bisecting them (the top line is thus the bowstring). >>

The Undeciphered Signs of Linear B: Interpretation and… books.google.com ›books› isbn = 1108494722Two possible Linear A antecedents have been suggested for twe: AB87 and A305 (Figure 2.4). … 234 No Cretan Hieroglyphic correspondences are suggested by CHIC: 19 or… Cretan Hieroglyphic 048 has a broadly similar form, but as this sign’s central ‘arrow’ does not appear in either of the potentially related Linear A signs or in Linear B twe a connection is not likely likely.

https://www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/pdf/2017/39/matecconf_cscc2017_05018.pdf Cretan Hieroglyph symbols and their IPA phonetic values. sign 048 = ”i”

file: /// C: / Users / User / Downloads / Decorte_R_P_J_E_2018_The_Origins_of_Bron% 20 (1) .pdf << The CHIC editors themselves consider # 048 as most likely Linear A: “we are inclined to think that it is linear A ”, citing Brice 1992 >>

Phaistos Disk Deciphered? Not Likely, Say Scholars – Biblical… http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org ›archeology-today› ph… In a TEDx talk in Heraklion on the Greek island of Crete, Gareth Owens… script (Egyptian Hieroglyphs), as well as a translation of that text into Greek. … Equate to the MLA sign AB41 (si) and the CHS sign CHIC # 048 and # 049.

Upon Andras Zeke http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/02/how-to-read-minoan-hieroglyphics.html The Cretan Hieroglyphic Signs and their Suspected

Linear A Equivalents # 048, 049 ‘archery’ signs (141) = AB41 / and

CONCLUSION: sign “Si”

– The sign “>>”                                                                                                                                              I found it in the exact form in the inventory of Aegean signs in the form “>” only on the Faistos disc (see No. 18): https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/53d6/370fac2ec6843740b9c0546632eeb5b5fbb4. pdf

http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/PHDisc/PHDiscSigns.html Sign 18

According to scientist Andis Kaulins-reading,> = Nw (No)

–The “schematic-Z” sign.                                                                                                                                      It exists in exact form in the Aegean inventory, the A / 9/2 sign, the “Pa” sign http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#11%22 * 03

“PA should be an abbreviation for a term modifying people…”

STATISTICS/Round tablet. Of the 12 signs, 3 are not found in identical form in the Aegean signs, 4 in identical form, and about 5 in similar form. TOTAL ALL 3 tablets:                                                                                           There are not at all in Aegean and exact shape: 6 Identical :7, similar :10,                                                                                 SO THE STATISTICS INDICATELY DECIDE for THE PRESENCE ON THE TABLETS OF AN AEGEAN WRITING.

This entry was posted on December 12, 2020 at 6:18 pm and is filed under Tartaria tablets. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.