4-sided Cretan pictogram bar with end shown & interpretations of pictograms

4-sided Cretan pictogram bar with end shown & interpretations of pictograms:

 

Advertisement

Cretan pictograms, Medallion E, Knossos, after Sir Arthur Evans

Cretan pictograms, Medallion E, Knossos, after Sir Arthur Evans:

A few of the Cretan pictograms on Medallion E, Knossos, lend themselves to possible/probable/definite decipherment. These are:

definite: 5. & 8. (adze, labrys)

probable: 3. & 7. (spice container, saffron)

possible: 9. 11. 12. (olive oil lamp, some kind of floral crop, dagger)

Everything else is indecipherable.

Cretan pictograms 118-156 represent the complex forms of unknown, indecipherable pictograms

Cretan pictograms 118-156 represent the complex forms of unknown, indecipherable pictograms:

Of these pictograms, a few might be susceptible to some sort of interpretation. These have note numbers following them in this form [1] [2] [3] [4]. [1] appears to be a variant of the pictogram, later the Linear A and Linear B syllabogram NI, which means “figs”. Both [2] and [3] could represent a bee, since the bee insignia is commonplace on Minoan pendants and necklaces. [4] appears to represent ships.

All 156 of the pictograms I have posted here on Linear A, Linear B, Knossos & Mycenae, are Class B pictograms, because they are incised on tablets, nodules and pendants in the same way Linear A and Linear B texts are incised in their respective syllabaries. Class A pictograms are more archaic than Class B, and appear mostly on stamps and seals. I shall display a few of the latter in upcoming posts. Class A pictograms, which often resemble Egyptian hieroglyphics, are all but indecipherable, although a very few may lend themselves to tentative decipherment. A few Class B pictograms, especially in the moderately complex to complex range, also close mirror Egyptian counterparts, and may convey similar or the same meanings. On the other hand, some, most or all of them may not. There is simply no way of knowing.

Cretan pictograms 85-117 represent the moderately complex forms of unknown, indecipherable pictograms

Cretan pictograms 85-117 represent the moderately complex forms of unknown, indecipherable pictograms:

 

Cretan pictograms 53-84 represent the simplest forms of unknown, indecipherable pictograms

Cretan pictograms 53-84 represent the simplest forms of unknown, indecipherable pictograms:

 

Cretan pictograms – 41-52: military and textiles (possibly/probably/definitely) known

Cretan pictograms – 41-52: military and textiles (possibly/probably/definitely) known:

Cretan pictograms dealing with the military and textiles/cloth are the last of the possibly/probably/definitely known pictograms out of a grand total of around 165, thus accounting for 31.5 % of all Cretan pictograms. So the number of possibly/probably/definitely known pictograms is significantly higher than had been previously thought. Of the military + textiles/cloth pictograms, 41. 42. 48. & 51. are definite, the remainder being probable/possible.

Cretan pictograms – 30-40: vessels (possibly/probably/definitely) known

Cretan pictograms – 30-40: vessels (possibly/probably/definitely) known:

Although we know that all of these pictograms represent vessels, only 30, 31, 33 & 38. are definite. All of the rest except 40., which is only possible, are probable.

Cretan pictograms – 24-29: livestock (possibly/probably/definitely) known

Cretan pictograms – 24-29: livestock (possibly/probably/definitely) known:

The Cretan pictograms in the livestock sector pretty much speak for themselves. The only definite one is that for rams. The rest are probable, and open to dispute.

Cretan pictograms – 15-23: crops (possibly/probably/definitely) known

Cretan pictograms – 15-23: crops (possibly/probably/definitely) known:

All of the Cretan pictograms from 15 to 23 definitely deal with crops, though in some cases we cannot tell for certain which ones. In other cases, the crops represented by their respective pictograms are either probably or definitely identified. 17a. & 17b. are spice containers. 19a. – 19c. are 3 variants for olives/olive oil. 22. is absolutely the ideogram for wheat. 20. (multiple variants) is saffron.

Cretan pictograms – the first 14: the origins of syllabograms

Cretan pictograms – the first 14: the origins of syllabograms:

Cretan pictograms – the first 14: the origins of syllabograms:

There are 14 Cretan syllabary-like pictograms, most of which look like primitive syllabograms in Linear A, but almost certainly are not syllabograms. But all of them but one (the crescent moon on its side) are (almost) identical to the Linear A syllabograms A, DA, DI, NI, NU, RU, QE, SE, TA, TE and TU. But it is without a shadow of a doubt a mistake to identify any of them as syllabograms as such. They are the primordial templates of the latter.

In my previous posts on Cretan pictograms, I asserted that there were only 45 of them. That was a grievous mistake. I was way off the mark. Upon close examination of all of the Cretan pictograms so meticulously identified by Sir Arthur Evans in Scripta Minoa (1909, 1952), I discovered to my amazement that there are around 200 of them, exclusive of numerics, which have been successfully deciphered by Evans. From here on in, all posts on Cretan pictograms, whether (possibly/probably/definitely) known or unknown, i.e indecipherable, will be numbered sequentially until the absolute total of them all is reached. As we can see, the first 14 are those which look like Linear A syllabograms. In the next post, I shall introduce the Cretan pictograms for crops, which number sequentially from 15 to 23. Subsequent posts will identify Cretan pictograms from 24 onward.

In spite of the fact that many researchers call Cretan pictograms hieroglyphs, they simply cannot be, since 200 is far too small a figure for hieroglyphics or for scripts like Cuneiform. Both of the latter contain at least 1,000 figures or characters. This clearly disqualifies Cretan pictograms as hieroglyphs. In 1909 Sir Arthur Evans correctly identified them as pictograms right from the outside, and his conclusions are sound.

The third example of Cretan ideograms/logograms, Malia label Mu MA/M Hf, possibly decipherable

The third example of Cretan ideograms/logograms, Malia label Mu MA/M Hf, possibly decipherable:

Click on the label, FRAGRANTICA, for more information about saffron as an ancient aromatic.

This is the third example of Cretan ideograms/logograms, Malia label Mu MA/M Hf. Surprising as it is, this label may be largely decipherable. It is subdivided into 3 sections. The first S1 is blank. The second, S2, appears to spill over from the first side to the second, while the third, S3, is found on the second side alone. The first ideogram in S2 (section 2) is probably the one for “saffron”, while the second is still indecipherable. The third is clearly some sort of representation of a woman. The X, which is indecipherable, is followed by the number 100. S2 continues on side 2, which begins with what is clearly the ideogram for “textiles/cloth”, followed by what appear to be 3 ideograms for “sword(s)”. If these 3 ideograms in fact designate “swords”, they are practically identical to those for “swords” in Linear B. Section 3 (S3) begins with what appears to be an ideogram for “garment(s)”, followed once again by textiles, and followed in turn by an indecipherable ideogram, which might possibly relate to cutting, S3 ending with the number 100.

A partial decipherment might read: aromatic saffron + ? + a weaver or weavers (all weavers were women) weaving 100 rolls of cloth, 3 of which serve to wrap 3 swords in + 100 garments of some kind of (cut) textiles (saffron dyed?).

The first two examples of so-called Cretan hieroglyphs appear to be 4 separate palm-leaf tablets, but are in fact one 4 sided-bar:

The first two examples of so-called Cretan hieroglyphs appear to be 4 separate palm-leaf tablets, but are in fact one 4 sided-bar:

The first two examples of so-called Cretan hieroglyphs appear to be 4 separate palm-leaf tablets, but are in fact one 4 sided-bar from Knossos. This is of great significance, because if I am right and the text is sequential, from start to finish, and runs dextrograde on each side (which it almost certainly does) then a clear pattern emerges. 5 distinct links are found on the four sides. These are clearly marked on the facsimile of this 4 sided bar (Knossos Hh (04) 03). Consequently, we can assume that this bar tallies contents, for which 5 key ideograms recur, signifying that there is a distinct coherence to the contents they tag. The four-sided bar appears to inventory not only agricultural items, namely, the produce of olive trees (olive oil) and some kind of grain crop, symbolized by the logogram which looks like the Linear A & B syllabogram ZU, but military ones as well. The ideogram for adze or labrys, which is the origin of the syllabogram A in Linear A and B, appears on face 1. Then we have what looks like a helmet on face 2 and a boar’s tusk helmet (L5) on face 4. (the latter the precursor, it would seem, of the Linear A & B syllabograms for E). Finally, we find an ideogram (L4) which looks like some kind of animal, and my bet is that it is a horse. All of these ideograms and logograms lend credence to a military interpretation.

So-called Cretan hieroglyphs are not hieroglyphs at all. Example 1

So-called Cretan hieroglyphs are not hieroglyphs at all. Example 1

These 2 palm-leaf tablets incised with Cretan symbols are the first example of why so-called Cretan hieroglyphs are not hieroglyphs at all. We note right off the top that there are only 6 symbols, all of which are in fact ideograms or logograms. The numeric symbols, 40 and 100 on the fist tablet and 50, 10 & 80 on the second, do not conform to Linear A and B standards. In Linear A & B, decimals to the tens (10…90) are represented by horizontal bars, 1 for 10, 2 for 20, 8 for 80 etc. It appears instead that the dots on these tablets represent decimals to the tens. This is partly because the figure for 100 on the first tablet accords with Linear A & B practice, making it more likely that the dots are indeed in the tens.

Some other symbols are clearly identifiable. No. 1. is definitely the ideogram for an adze or labrys, which in Linear A and B is metamorphosed into the syllabogram for the vowel A. 2. is more likely to represent olive tree(s) rather than olive(s), for reasons which will become apparent in upcoming examples. 5. is very likely the ideogram for helmet, because it is very similar to same ideogram in Linear B.

So what are these palm-leaf tablets about? The first appears to be primarily military, te second primarily agricultural, with the sole exception of the ideogram for helmet, which appears out of place. But perhaps it is not. Perhaps the olive tree crops are being defended by the military. We shall never know.