The supersyllabogram DA = dapu = “double axe” in Mycenaean Linear B: This unusual supersyllabogram appears on only 3 Linear B tablets from Knossos... unusual not only because it is rare, but also because it is either oncharged or supercharged onto the syllabogram for “double axe”. This would imply that the supersyllabogram DA is an associative, not attributive supersyllabogram, given that attributive supersyllabograms are otherwise without exception incharged in their ideograms. This leaves us in a bit of a quandary, because we should expect that DA is attributive and not associative. Its position (supercharged or oncharged) on this tablet and the other 2 like it indicates that it should be associative. But a double axe can neither be associated with itself nor be an attribute of itself. That is a contradiction in terms. So what are we to make of this bizarre positioning of the supersyllabogram DA onto the ideogram for the double axe? I can come up with no explanation other than that the supersyllabogram DA is neither attributive nor associative, but is simply itself per se. What is even more astonishing is the fact that the ideogram and the supersyllabogram are essentially one and the same thing. Was the scribe at a bit of a loss in his attempt to “describe” the double axe as a supersyllabogram? Actually, I don't think so. What he was doing in this particular instance was emphasizing or, if you like, stressing the fact that he was focused on the double axe. In this context, it appears that the ideogram for “double axe” coupled with its supersyllabogram must take precedence over the rest of the text on this tablet. The tablet is focused sharply on the inventory of the double axe, which takes precedence over any other consideration. At least that is my take on it. Here we have two illustrations highlighting the conspicuous symbolism of the double axe in Minoan/Mycenaean iconography:
4 thoughts on “The supersyllabogram DA = dapu = “double axe” in Mycenaean Linear B”
Hi Richard, I am a little confused with this tablet. i.e. – Beginning with RA – then you have WE should it be RE Hope you don’t mind me checking. Best wishes Rita.
Sorry about that. I only had to click on the link to see it. It is a bit tricky. The spelling of the word contains RE, whereas the word for leader of the host = rawaketa, begins with RA. that is why my translation is highly conjectural, i.e. a wild guess. But, hey, why not?
O.K. Thanks !!
Comments are closed.