hieroglyphics in the blazing sun burning my eyes outhieroglyphiques sous le soleil brûlant qui me brûlent les yeux Richard Vallance
Tag: hieroglyphics
Several Egyptian hieroglyphic determinatives
Several Egyptian hieroglyphic determinatives:
Determinatives appear in every single Egyptian inscription. Determinatives appear to the right of each inscription. It is not possible to write any word or sentence in Egyptian hieroglyphics without appending a determinative, because without determinatives, inscriptions are meaningless. Many words are identical in Egyptian hieroglyphics, and without a determinative, they would be meaningless.
Share this:
HOW TO SAY 8 WORDS in Egyptian hieroglyphics, Mycenaean Linear B, ancient Greek and modern Greek!
HOW TO SAY 8 WORDS in Egyptian hieroglyphics, Mycenaean Linear B, ancient Greek and modern Greek!
Share this:
Cleopatra and Ptolemy in Egyptian hieroglyphics and in Linear B!
PYRAMID in Egyptian hieroglyphics, Mycenaean Linear B, ancient and modern Greek
FALCON in Egyptian hieroglyphics, Mycenaean Linear B, ancient Greek & modern Greek
Egyptian hieroglyphic for CROCODILE = DPY, definitely someone to avoid!!!
Egyptian hieroglyphic for CROCODILE = DPY, definitely someone to avoid!!! He would eat the feathers anyway, and the bird to go with it, and you TOO if he had the chance!!!
Share this:
Egyptian hieroglyphics for BOAT = DPT
The Egyptian hieroglyphic word for DAY = HRW
The Egyptian hieroglyphic word for pyramid = BNBNT
The Egyptian hieroglyphic word for falcon BIK
I am learning Egyptian hieroglyphics!
Cretan hieroglyphics on a four-sided seal/nodule may reveal signs of early Linear A
Cretan hieroglyphics on a four-sided seal/nodule may reveal signs of early Linear A:
Share this:
CRITICAL POST: Ancient words from 3,000 – 1,200 BCE in modern English
CRITICAL POST: Ancient words from 3,000 – 1,200 BCE in modern English:
First the ancient words in modern English, and in the next two posts, how words infiltrate from earlier to diachronically close later languages. These posts are real eye-openers, explaining how words from earlier languages trickle into later, e.g. Akkadian and Sanskrit into Linear A (Minon) and Linear B (Mycenaean) + how all of the ancient words here infiltrate English.
Akkadian/Assyrian (3,000 BCE):
babel babilu = Babylon; gate of God (Akkadian)
bdellium budulhu = pieces (Assyrian)
canon, canyon qanu = tube, reed (Assyrian)
cumin kumunu = carrot family plant (Akkadian)
natron sodium (Akkadian)
myrrh murru (Akkadian)
sack saqqu (Akkadian)
shalom = hello sholom/shlama = hello (also Hebrew)
souk saqu = narrow (Akkadian)
Semitic (2,000-1,000 BCE):
arbiter arbiter (Latin from Phoenician)
byssus bwtz = linen cloth, to be white (Semitic)
chemise gms = garment (Ugaritic)
deltoid dalt (Phoenician)
fig pag (paleo-Hebrew)
iotacism iota (Phoenician)
map (Phoenician)
mat matta (Phoenician)
shekel tql (Canaanite)
Egyptian (2690 BCE):
http://www.egyptologyforum.org/AEloans.html
adobe
alabaster
alchemy
ammonia
baboon 5
barge, bark, barque, to embark
basalt
behemoth
bocal
chemistry 10
copt, coptic
desert
Egypt
ebony
endive 15
gum
gypsy
ibis
ivory
lily 20
oasis
obelisk
manna
mummy
myth 25
papyrus
paper
pharaoh
pharmacy
phoenix 30
pitcher
pyramid
sack See also saqqu (Akkadian)
sash
Susan(na), Phineas, Moses, Potiphar, Potiphera 35
sphinx
stibium = eye paint
tart
uraeus (emblem on the headdress of the pharaoh)39
Sanskrit (2,000 BCE):
aniline nili (Sanskrit)
Aryan aryas = noble, honourable
atoll antala
aubergine vātigagama = eggplant, aubergine
avatar avatara = descent
bandana bandhana = a bond
banyan vaṇij = merchant
beryl vaidūrya (Sanskrit, Dravidian)
bhakti bhakti = portion
candy khaṇḍakaḥ, from khaṇḍaḥ = piece, fragment
cashmere shawl made of cashmere wool
cheetah chitras = uniquely marked
chintz chitras = clear, bright
cot khatva
cobra kharparah = skull
crimson krmija = red dye produced by a worm
crocus kunkunam = saffron, saffron yellow
datura dhattūrāh = a kind of flowering plant
dinghy dronam = tiny boat
ginger srngaveram, from srngam “horn” + vera = body
guar gopali = annual legume
gunny goni = sack
guru gurus = bachelor
jackal srgalah = the howler
Java/java = island/coffee Yavadvipa= Island of Barley, from yava
= barley + dvipa =island
juggernaut jagat-natha-s = lord of the world
jungle jangala = arid
jute jutas = twisted hair
karma karman = action
kermes kṛmija = worm-made
lacquer lākṣā
lilac nila = dark blue
loot lotam = he steals
mandala mandala = circle
mandarin mantri = an advisor
mantra mantras = holy message or text
maya maya = illusion
Mithras mitrah = friend
mugger makara = sea creature, crocodile
musk mus = mouse
nard naladam = nard
nirvanas nirvanas = extinction, blowing out (candle)
opal upalah = opal
orange narangas = orange tree
pal bhrata = brother
palanquin palyanka = bed, couch
panther pāṇḍara = pale
pepper pippali = long pepper
punch pancha = drink from alcohol, sugar, lemon, water,
tea or spices
pundit paṇdita =learned
rajah rajan = king
rice vrihi-s = rice, derived from proto-Dravidian
rupee rūpyakam =silver coin
saccharin sarkarā
sandal wood candanam = wood for burning incense
sapphire sanipriya = sacred to Shani (Sanskrit) = Greek,
Saturn
sari sati = garment
shawl sati = strip of cloth
sugar sharkara = ground sugar
swami svami = master
tank tadaga-m =pond, lake pool, large artificial
container for liquid
tope stupah
yoga yogas = yoke, union
yogi yogin = one who practices yoga, ascetic
zen dhyana = meditation
Linear A (1,800-1,500 BCE):
cedar keda = cedar
cumin kuminaqe = and cumin See also Linear B kumino
kumi/non Cf. kumunu = carrot family plant
(Akkadian)
lily rairi (also Egyptian) -or- nila = dark blue
(Sanskrit)
pimento pimata = pimento
rose rosa = rose
sack saka sa/kka <- sa/kkoj = coarse cloth of hair from
goats; sackcloth -or- sa/ka <- sa/koj a shield made
of wicker See also saqqu = sack (Akkadian)
Linear A & Linear B (1,800-1,200 BCE):
agriculture akara/akaru a1kra (arch. acc.) – or – = end, border
+ akaru a0gro/j = field Cf. Linear B akoro a0gro/j
democracy dima/dimaru dh=maj <- dh=moj = land, country; people Cf. Linear B damo = village da=moj Mother goddess of Mount Ida Idamate/Idamete 0Idama/te Rhea, goddess of Mount Ida Idarea 0Idar9ea healer ijate i0a/ter = doctor, physician Cf. Linear iyate i0a/ter calligraphy karu = ka/llu <- ka/lloj = beautiful, fine, ornamental copper kaki/kaku xalku/ <- xalko/j = copper, bronze crimson punikaso funi/kasoj = crimson, red (of wine) Cf. Linear B ponikiya ponikiyo foini/kioj = crimson Cf. krmija = red dye produced by a worm (Sanskrit) crocus kuruku kro/koj = crocus, saffron Cf. crocus kunkunam = saffron, saffron yellow (Sanskrit) Lykinthos Rukito Cf. Linear B Rukito Lu/kinqoj minth mita mi/nqa = mint Cf. Linear B mita nard naridi na/ridi <- na/rdoj = with nard. See also naladam (Sanskrit) new nea ne/a (feminine) = new Cf. Linear B ne/#a = new pistachio-nut pitakase/pitakesi pista/kesi = with pistachio-nuts (instr. pl.) Phoenician punikaso funi/kasoj = crimson, red (of wine) Cf. Linear B ponikiya ponikiyo foini/kioj = crimson Cf. krmija = red dye produced by a worm (Sanskrit) Phaistos Paito Faisto/j Cf. Linear Paito Rhea rea r9e/a = goddess, Rhea sack saka sa/kka (arch. acc.) <- sa/kkoj = coarse cloth of hair from goats; sackcloth -or- sa/ka <- sa/koj a shield made of wicker Cf. See also saqqu (Akkadian) sesame sasame sasa/me = sesame Cf. Linear B sasa/ma terebinth tree tarawita = terebinth tree Cf. Linear B kitano ki/rtanoj & timito ti/rminqoj thalassian tarasa = sea Cf. Linear B tarasa qa/lassa thorax toraka qw/rac = breastplate, cuirass = Linear B toraka throne turunu qo/rnoj = throne Cf. Linear B torono qo/rnoj wine winu #i/nu = wine Cf. Linear B wono = wine, vine #oi/noj wine dedicated to Mother Earth winumatari NM #i/numa/tari = wine dedicated to Mother Earth yoked zokutu zogutu/ <- zogwto/j = yoked, with a cross- bar zone zuma zw=ma girdle, belt; girded tunic
Mycenaean Linear B (1,600-1,200 BCE):
aeon eo e0wn = being
anemometer anemo a0ne/mwn = wind
angel akero a0ngge/loj = messenger
agora akora a0gora/ = market
axles akosone a1conej = axles
amphorae aporowe a0mfore#ej
armaments amota a3rmo/ta = chariot
anthropology atoroqo a0nqrw/poj = man, human being
aulos (musical instrument)auro a0ulo/j = flute, musical instrument
cardamon kadamiya kardami/a = cardamon
celery serino se/linon = celery
chiton kito xitw/n = chiton
circular kukereu kukleu/j = circle
coriander koriyadana koli/adna
cumin kumino kum/minon Cf. kumunu = carrot family plant
(Akkadian)
curator korete kore/ter = governor
cypress kuparo ku/pairoj
divine diwo Di/#oj = Zeus
duo dwo du#o/ = two
elephant erepa e0le/faj = ivory (in Mycenaean)
eremite eremo e1remoj = desert
foal poro pw/loj = foal
gynecology kunaya gunai/a = woman
heterosexual hatero a3teroj e3teroj = other
hippodrome iqo i3ppoj = horse
labyrinth dapuritoyo = labyrinth laburi/nqoj
linen rino li/non
lion rewo le/#wn = lion
mariner marineu marineu/j = sailor, mariner
maternal matere ma/ter = mother
Mesopotamia Mesopotomo Mesopota/moj = Mesopotamia
metropolis matoropuro matro/puloj = mother city
nautical nao nau/j = ship
non-operational noopere nwfe/lioj = useless
operation opero o1feloj = operation
paternal pate pa/ter = father
paramedic para para\ = beside, from beside, by the side of,
beyond etc.
pharmaceutical pamako fa/rmakon = medicine
polypod porupode polu/pode polu/pouj = octopus
progressive poro pro\ = in front of
purple popureyo pofurei/a = purple
quartet qetoro tetta/rej = four
schinus kono skoi/noj (flowering pepper)
strategic tatakeu startageu/j = general
stylobate tatamo staqmo/j = standing post, door post
temenos temeno (piece of land assigned as an official
domain (to royalty)
theological teo qe/oj = god
trapeze topeza to/rpeza tra/peza = table
tripod tiripode tri/pwj = tripod
vision wide #ei/de = to see
xenophobic kesenuwiyo ce/n#ioj = stranger
© by Richard Vallance Janke 2017
Share this:
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.
Share this:
How can so-called Cretan hieroglyphs be hieroglyphs when there are only 45 of them?
How can so-called Cretan hieroglyphs be hieroglyphs when there are only 45 of them?
Until now most researchers have simply assumed that the 45 Cretan symbols (by my count), exclusive of numerics, must be hieroglyphs. But the evidence appears to gainsay this hypothesis. As the table below makes quite clear, there are only 45 Cretan symbols, to which
only 27 may possibly/probably/definitely be assigned meanings.
The significance of the remaining 18 are currently beyond the bounds of decipherment:
So this lands us with a total of only 45 Cretan symbols. If and when we compare this number with the approximately 1,000 Egyptian hieroglyphs, the whole notion that the Cretan symbols are hieroglyphs comes apart at the seams and is shattered.
And that is not the end of it. There are anywhere between 600 and 1,000 symbols in Cuneiform.
So once again, the massive proliferation of symbols, i.e. hieroglyphs, in Egyptian, and of symbols in Cuneiform make a mockery of the notion that the Cretan symbols are hieroglyphs. But if they are not hieroglyphs, what are they? It would appear that they are ideograms or logograms on seals and nodules which serve to tag the contents of the (papyrus) documents they seal. This hypothesis makes a lot of sense, since almost all Cretans and Minoans, administrators, merchants and consumer, were illiterate. These people were probably able to master the minimal number of 45 ideograms and logograms which we find on 100s of surviving seals. But while the illiterate hoy polloi could not read the script on the sealed papyrus (or leaf tablets sometimes), the scribes most definitely could. This leaves us open to yet another hypothetical question? What is the script of the texts? How many symbols or syllabograms (if the latter yet existed) would have been required to write the papyrus or inscribe the leaf tablets? Was this script, if script it was, an early form of Linear A, such as Festive Linear A? Or was it actually Linear A? This question or hypothesis demands further investigation.
Share this:
RE Cretan “hieroglyphs”: Brewminate: a Bold Blend of News & Ideas: We’re Never Far from Where we Were: Form Follows Function: Writing and its Supports in the Aegean Bronze Age
RE Cretan “hieroglyphs”: Brewminate: a Bold Blend of News & Ideas: We're Never Far from Where we Were: Form Follows Function: Writing and its Supports in the Aegean Bronze Age by Dr. Sarah Finlayson, Archaeologist/Historian Posted March 29 2017
Excerpta from the source with COMMENTS by Richard Vallance Janke inserted where necessary: ...a starting point from which to unpick the complex and changing relationships between writing and its material supports during the Aegean Bronze Age, [is] the basic hypothesis that the shape of objects which bear writing, the Bronze Age ‘office stationery’ so to speak, derives from the use to which they, object + writing, are put and the shape changes as this purpose changes. COMMENT: The shapes of incised objects (exograms) derive from the uses to which they are put. In other words, if the exograms, which, contrary to popular belief, are not hieroglyphs, change not only their form (i.e. shape) but have specific shapes tailored to the functions they perform. For this reason, among others, I cannot accept the hypothesis that they are hieroglyphs. They appear rather to be ideograms and logograms specifically designed to represent the contents of “packages” or “official documents”, sometimes apparently written on papyrus, and therefore subsequently lost due to the climate of Crete which as not conducive to the preservation of papyrus. What the exograms were which were inscribed on the lost documents for which the clay forms served as content indicators we shall never know, but chances are that the papyrus contents were written in Linear A. The incised objects, and I quote, “noduli, flat-based sealings, cones, medallions, labels, three- and four-sided bars, and tablets” specifically served as incised “subject headings” for the contents on papyrus which they represented. Since most people in the palace administration in the Minoan era in which Linear A was the standard syllabary were illiterate, the so-called Cretan “hieroglyphs”, of which there only 45 by my count, exclusive of numerics, served as ideogrammatic guideline markers for the contents of the documents which were once attached to them. Illiterate people could “read” ideograms; they could not read Linear A. (all italics mine throughout this post) Finlayson continues: The clay documents comprise crescents (all terms are defined below), noduli, flat-based sealings, cones, medallions, labels, three- and four-sided bars, and tablets (Olivier and Godart 1996: 10–11; Younger 1996–1997: 396). There are also substantial numbers of direct object sealings, which show seal impressions but no incised writing (Krzyszkowska 2005: 99). COMMENT: The “substantial numbers of direct object sealings” are seal impressions without incised writing because the contents, probably written and not incised on papyrus, which they seal have been lost forever. Thus, the script in which the actual sealed documents has been lost. But what was that script? Was it more of the same? ... Cretan “hieroglyphs”? I very much doubt that, because not a single Cretan seal can be read as syllabic text in a syllabary. What script was the writing on papyrus of the sealed documents? That is the whole point, and the whole mystery. Could it have been an early version of Linear A, a.ka. as Festive Linear A? Quite possibly. Finlayson continues: Easier to understand are the gable-shaped hanging nodules (Figure 3d). These sealings are carefully shaped around a knotted string, and carry a seal impression on one face (Krzyszkowska 2005: 280). The majority are uninscribed (only 22 out of the 164 sealings from Pylos carry an inscription), but on those examples with incised text, an ideogram is usually written over the seal impression, and additional sign-groups can appear on the other faces (Palaima 2003: 174; Krzyszkowska 2005: 280). Analysis of the cache of 60 nodules from Thebes, 56 of which have inscriptions, has enabled a convincing reconstruction of their use. The gable shape of the nodules results from the way the clay is held between the fingers while impressing the seal and writing the inscription (Piteros et al. 1990: 113). This shape, together with its suspension cord, give (sic) a small, solid, virtually indestructible and very portable document (Piteros et al. 1990: 183). In this instance, form does not strictly follow function, but rather the two aspects are intertwined in a more complex way. A key part of these documents’ function is their portability, and this governs their very small size, which in turn means only the most important information is recorded, namely the seal impression, the ideogram which identifies the goods, and, rarely, a small amount of additional data, such as anthroponyms, toponyms, transactional terms (Piteros et al. 1990: 177). The formula ‘personal name (here represented by the seal impression) + object + toponym / second personal name’ is equivalent to that recorded on the ‘palm-leaf ’ tablets. Numerals are rare, because that information is supplied by the object itself. It is suggested that each nodule accompanies a single item, mostly livestock in the Theban examples, from the hinterland into the palatial centre, with the nodule acting as a primary document, recording the most crucial information about its object, the sex of the animal, for example, and also certifying or authenticating, by the seal impression, who is responsible for it (probably in the sense of ‘owing’ the item to the palace; Piteros et al. 1990: 183–184). It is important to note, however, that, except at Thebes, there are considerably fewer inscribed than uninscribed nodules. Sealings of this type would therefore seem to be primarily recording instruments within transactions that do not require the use of writing (Palaima 2003: 174), although this is not incompatible with their being primary documents as described above. So few noduli survive that it is difficult to understand how they functioned (Krzyszkowska 2005: 284). I discuss this form below as they are significantly more common in LA administration. (Italics by Richard Vallance Janke) Roundels (Figure 2c) are clay disks with one or more seal impressions around their rim, and usually with a LA inscription on one or both faces, but with no trace of having been hung from or pressed against another object (Hallager 1996: 82). The number of seal impressions on the rim probably specifies the quantity of the commodity recorded in the inscription (livestock, agricultural produce, cloth, vessels and so on), with each impression representing one unit (Hallager 1996: 100–101, 113). Analysis of impressions and inscriptions suggests that at least two people made a roundel, one wielding the seal and another, the stylus (Hallager 1996: 112). These two factors have led to the interpretation of these documents as receipts, created and held by the central administration to record goods disbursed; the seal user would be the recipient, certifying with his or her impression the quantity of goods received (Hallager 1996: 116). Significantly, the physical limitations of these documents necessarily restrict the size of transactions, with 15 units being the largest amount attested (Palaima 1990: 92). COMMENT on the sentence “a roundel, one wielding the seal and another, the stylus (Hallager 1996: 112). These two factors have led to the interpretation of these documents as receipts, created and held by the central administration to record goods disbursed; the seal user would be the recipient, certifying with his or her impression the quantity of goods received...” In other words, the actual contents of the documents (apparently written with a stylus on papyrus) to which these seals were affixed may have been administrative receipts or possibly even inventories, in which case the contents of the documents were probably not written in so-called Cretan hieroglyphs, limited as these are to 45. And by 45 I mean 45 ideograms and logograms + additional numerics and nothing more than that. Given that these 45 signs never form any legible sentence or phrase, it is highly unlikely they would have been used for the writing of the contents on papyrus for which they serve as seals. Finlayson continues: Noduli (Figure 2e), disk- or dome-shaped lumps of clay with a seal impression but no perforation, imprints of objects, or other visible means of fastening (“sealings that do not seal” [Weingarten 1986: 4]) are a very long-lasting document form, found from the early First Palace through to the Late Bronze Age, but they are particularly common in Second Palace Period LA administration, with around 130 examples known (Krzyszkowska 2005: 161; Weingarten 1990a: 17). Only eight have LA inscriptions or countermarks over the seal impression (Hallager 1996: 127). As they are clearly not attached to anything, noduli are independent documents, and their primary purpose seems to be to carry a seal impression, that is to authenticate or certify something. By analogy with Old Babylonian practice, Weingarten (1986: 18) suggests they are originally dockets, receipts for work done, with the seal impression being made by the overseer to authorise ‘payment’; as the form becomes more widespread in the Second Palace Period, they become more like tokens, to be exchanged for goods or services, or as laissez-passer, with the seal impression identifying the carrier as legitimate (Weingarten 1990a: 19–20). COMMENT: The previous sentence, beginning with “By analogy...” and ending with “as legitimate” gives us a clearer impression the function(s) of the seals as these relate to the contents they seal. Old Babylonian tablets were incised or written in Cuneiform, which is a readable script meant for the eyes of literate scribes only. Note that the inventorial contents of the Babylonian tablets were clearly written out in Cuneiform. Although this practice is at variance with that of the Cretan seals, it still all boils down to the same thing. The actual contents of the documents to which the Cretan seals were affixed were written out in a language, possibly unknown, possibly Linear A. So in either case, the Babylonian or the Cretan, contents appear to be intended for literate scribes. Finlayson continues: Moving on to the ‘passive’ sealed documents, single-hole hanging nodules (Figure 2g) are roughly triangular clay sealings, formed around a knot at the end of a piece of string or cord (Hallager 1996: 160–161). They have a seal impression on one face, and a single incised LA sign, or very rarely another seal impression, on one of the other faces (Hallager 1996: 161). There are five sub- categories of single-hole nodule, differentiated by shape and position of seal impression or inscription (pendant, pyramid, cone, dome / gable and pear, see Figure 2g) with pendant being by far the most common (Hallager 1996: 162–163). About 13 signs or ligatures are found on these nodules, but it is very difficult to discern their meaning; the restricted range might suggest they are acting as arbitrary symbols, along the lines of ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’, rather than as syllabograms (Krzyszkowska 2005: 160). These nodules hang from something, although there is no evidence for what (Krzyszkowska 2005: 160). Hallager has proposed a use similar to that observed in contemporary Egypt, where nodules were hung from rolls of papyrus as identification labels, with their cord threaded through holes in the lower part of the scroll to enable it to be unrolled and read without breaking the cord or sealed nodule (Hallager 1996: 198–199). COMMENTS: Once again, the practice of Cretan using seals seems to be very similar if not identical to that of contemporary Egyptian hieroglyphic writing on papyrus, with the critical difference being that Egyptian hieroglyphs are writing, while Cretan seal ideograms are not. But the contents of the Cretan documents on papyrus were probably also written in a script, probably a syllabary, and possibly even (Festive) Linear A. But since the Cretan papyri are lost to history, we shall never know. Was there a “Cretan” script for the written documents on papyrus. It is notable that the Egyptian papyrus, once unsealed, was meant to read, again by literate scribes. Was this the Cretan practice too? Quite likely. Finlayson continues: The bars (Figure 1a) are usually rectangular, inscribed on all four sides, and sometimes pierced with a hole at one end (Hallager 1996: 33). That the bars could be suspended suggests they might be used as labels attached to objects for transport or storage, but the information on them seems to be much like that on the tablets, and, in fact, the unpierced examples are perhaps best understood as variants of the standard tablet format (Hallager 1996: 33). Olivier (1994–1995: 268–269) offers an intriguing alternative explanation, that the bars are not attached by cords to any object, but instead hang together on some sort of horizontal rod to enable them to be sorted and stored, or taken down when additional data are inscribed on them; he envisions the bars operating like the LB ‘palm-leaf ’ tablets, for compiling basic data. Returning now to LA administration, it seems that a link exists between the architectural context of deposits and their composition and function (Schoep 2002b: 25). Although few documents have been found in primary contexts, it is nevertheless possible to identify three commonly occurring groupings (Schoep 1995: 57). “Full combination deposits” always contain single-hole hanging nodules, alongside tablets and other sealings; as the single-hole nodules are postulated to hang from the highest-level records, on perishable materials, these deposits may be ‘archives’ (Schoep 1995: 61). COMMENT: These (sealed) documents may have been ‘archives’, and if they are, they were probably written out (on papyrus) but not in so-called Cretan hieroglyphs. Finlayson continues: This seems to be supported by their location, in central buildings (including Malia Palace, Zakros House A, and the ‘villa’ at Ayia Triada), usually on an upper floor in residential quarters, clearly separated from storage or work areas, and by their association with valuable objects (Schoep 1995: 61, table 3, 62). ‘Single type deposits’ consist of direct object sealings, tablets or noduli, and most seem to be in the location in which they functioned; the direct object sealings are found in magazines suitable for bulk storage, as at Monastiraki, while tablet or noduli deposits can also occur in smaller-scale storage rooms, for example, Houses I, Chania or FG, Gournia (Schoep 1995: 62–63). “Limited combination deposits” fall somewhere in between; deposits from the ‘villa’ at Ayia Triada and Zakros Palace contain tablets and sealed documents, in workshop or storage areas, while other deposits contain only sealings, ... In reviewing the evidence for LA use in the Second Palace Period, one gets an impression of a widespread use of writing on several media, and for several purposes, with either the writing support being manipulated to add meaning to the text (as with the clay administrative documents) or the other way around (as might be the case with some of the non-administrative objects). COMMENT: Finlayson notes that the the writing may have been manipulated to add meaning to the texts, in this case written on clay documents. She is making a clear distinction between the ideograms and logograms used on the seals themselves and the writing of the texts which they seal. Finlayson continues: Although examples of writing are relatively widespread in the landscape, this need not necessarily equate to widespread literacy, not least because it seems likely that writing is principally an elite activity, and furthermore, that restricted contexts of use possibly mean that ordinary, non-writing, people might well interact with only a single kind, or a small range, of documents, creating a sort of sub-category of literacy, where understanding part of a text’s meaning derives largely from the form of its support and context of use. (all italics by the Commentator, Richard Vallance Janke). COMMENT: The passage above rams home that fact that literacy was not widespread. Quite the contrary. Only the scribes were literate. On the other hand, the form of the so-called Cretan hieroglyphs were accessible to non-literates, which was everyone except the scribes. That way, non-literate administrators, merchants, distributors of commodities and end users of these could identify what the purpose of what each and every seal represented, without having to be able to read the contents of documents per se. Finlayson continues: Clearly, for some of the sealed document forms, the loss of whatever they were associated with means our understanding of their use cannot, without speculation, extend much beyond inferring that they hung from or were affixed to something. Generally, the taphonomy of writing in the Aegean is problematic, as we depend on it being applied to materials that are preserved archaeologically; in the case of clay documents that were not deliberately fired, this means accidental preservation in a wider burnt context (Bennet 2008: 6). There is then an inevitable risk that, in an effort to make up for the gaps in the evidence, particularly with CH and LA where we cannot read the texts, we rely too heavily on aspects like differences in form, which might be a reflection of our own ‘etic’ analyses rather than of different ancient practices (Bennet 2005: 269). “Classer, c’est interpréter” (Godart and Olivier 1979: xxiv) is a crucial principle for understanding a large and complex database at the macro scale, but runs the risk of misrepresenting, at the micro scale, differences in form that result from regional peculiarities of use, or are a function of the way different individuals form and seal or inscribe each shape, as seems likely, for example, for some of the variation amongst LA single-hole hanging nodules (Krzyszkowska 2005: 159–160). While these points must be borne in mind, it is nevertheless reasonable to suggest that the observable changes in document forms point to alterations in the methods of data gathering, processing and storing (Palaima 1984: 305). I would pick out two as particularly significant. The first is the bundle of changes in sealing practices between the First and Second Palace periods (i.e. between CH / limited LA use, and widespread LA use): direct object sealing is abandoned, suggesting, on the one hand, that the security of storerooms and their contents is managed differently, in a less physical way (Weingarten 1990b: 107–108), and, on the other, that direct control of commodities, by means of attaching sealings to them, is replaced by more indirect methods of controlling commodity information with hanging nodules and tablets (Knappett 2001: 86, n. 26). Furthermore, writing, with one exception, no longer appears on seals themselves, but from this point on is incised or painted rather than formed by stamping (Bennet 2008: 9–10). What drives these changes is difficult to evaluate, not least because we assume that changes in sealing systems are necessarily tied to changes in writing systems (and possibly language; Bennet 2005: 270). COMMENT: Key phrase “we assume”. Changes in sealing systems, from simple pictographic seals to seals incised in Cretan “hieroglyphs” and eventually to Linear A & B incised directly on the seals do not at all necessarily reflect any changes in the writing systems in which the actual documents (usually on papyrus) were written. That is a false assumption. Note here that Bennet specifically states that the writing systems sealed by the seals were probably independent of the figures or exograms found on the seals, these often being so-called Cretan hieroglyphs. The written language(s) of the document contents have have changed over time, but not necessarily in tune with the seals themselves. Point well taken. Palaima’s suggestion that LA replaces CH because the latter script is inadequate to record increasingly complex economic activities (1990: 94) is a case in point, and this sort of utilitarian motivation underestimates the potential for writing to be used for ideological reasons. The transition from CH to LA, and from LA to LB, can arguably be seen as part of a deliberate construction of new identities, through the manipulation of knowledge resources or material culture, by elite groups (ALL italics by the Commentator), seeking to differentiate themselves from their predecessors, or exclude others from participating in political or economic life (Bennet 2008: 20; Schoep 2007: 59). Knappett’s observation that, in seeking to look through artefacts to see “the people behind them”, and their motivations or choices, there is a tendency for the objects themselves to be reduced to mere ciphers or emblems of human activity (Knappett 2008b: 122), is also pertinent here. He suggests that more attention be paid to the agency of artefacts, to the possibility that things can “take on a life of their own, entangling humans and pushing them along new, previously unrecognised paths” (Knappett 2008b: 122); while ascribing agency to objects is problematic (Morphy 2009: 6), Knappett is nevertheless right to stress the complexity of the relationship between artefacts and their users. COMMENT: Much more to follow in the upcoming posts on the uses of pictographs and so-called Cretan “hieroglyphic” seals.
Share this:
Early Minoan hieroglyphic roundels and seals may lend some insight into the later development of the Linear A syllabary
Early Minoan hieroglyphic roundels and seals may lend some insight into the later development of the Linear A syllabary:
As illustrated above, early Minoan hieroglyphic roundels and seals may lend some insight into the later development of the Linear A syllabary. Notice that the the hieroglyphic for an axe or labrys looks remarkably like the Linear A and Linear B syllabogram for A, while the Y shaped hieroglyphic, whatever it is supposed to represent (and no one knows what), is similar to the Linear A syllabogram for SA. So it is conceivable, however remotely, that this hieroglyphic seal may actually read asa or saa, whichever way you read it (not that we have any idea what that is supposed to mean).Then we have the hieroglyphic marked with an asterisk (*). This looks very much like a vase, amphora or flask to hold wine, water or possibly even olive oil. There is another one which looks like a fish. That should not be too surprising, given that the ideogram for fish does appear on at least one extant Linear A fragment from Phaistos, as we have witnessed in a recent previous post. Finally, on the bottom line, the seal marked (f) bears a hieroglyphic which looks like a bat, and this in turn may very well be the antecedent to the Linear A syllabogram MA. But this hieroglyphic is not that of a bat, but rather of a cat, which we can see from the beautiful seal on the top left of the illustration. This is substantiated by the some of the variations in the scribal hands for Linear A MA, which indeed look like the visage of a cat, as we see here:
So I guess it is a cat.
Share this:
A truly fascinating Cretan hieroglyphic tablet from Phaistos!
A truly fascinating Cretan hieroglyphic tablet from Phaistos!I dare say I find this tablet one of the most intriguing I have ever run across. I is just jam packed with information! I have done my best to decipher at least a little of it. .5 is probably the earliest version for the later-to-become ideogram for “roasted einkorn wheat”. Likewise .8 is almost certainly the primordial ideogram for “figs”. I have also provided the translation for the word “figs” in Old Minoan. It is either nire (singular nira2=nirae) or nite (singular nita2=nitai). It can only be one or other of these 2 options. I was the first person ever to successfully decipher the Old Minoan word for “figs” several months ago.
Share this:
Knossos clay bar P103, Cretan hieroglyphics, predating Linear A
Knossos clay bar P103, Cretan hieroglyphics, predating Linear A:While some of the signs on this clay bar resemble Linear A syllabograms and ideograms, the meaning of almost all of them is entirely a mystery. However, .3 looks like the Linear A & B ideogram for “hide/leather/fleece” .4 probably represents wheat .5 so strongly resembles the Linear A ideogram for “olives/olive tree” that I take it to signify just that. .7 looks like the Linear A ideogram for “bull/ox(en)”. Except for the numerics, the rest is indecipherable.
Canadian Zen Haiku canadien ISSN 1705-4508 
You must be logged in to post a comment.