KEY POST: 2 vastly different decipherments of Minoan Linear A tablet HT 13 (Haghia Triada). Does either measure up? In this post we compare two vastly different decipherments of Minoan Linear A tablet HT 13 (Haghia Triada). The key question here can be posed in three different ways: 1. Doesoneof these two decipherments measure up significantly more than the other? 2. Does either measure up? 3. Does neither measure up? Here are the two decipherments, first that of Pavel Serafimov and Anton Perdih: and secondly, my own decipherment: According to option 3 above, it is of course possible thatneitherof these translations forms a faithful semantic and semiotic map of the original Linear A text (whatever it actually means). On the other hand, it is much more likely that option 1. above is applicable, namely that only one of the two decipherments at least approaches a faithful semantic and semiotic map of the original Linear A text , although we can never really know how faithfully until such time as Minoan Linear B is properly and fully deciphered. And that will not happen anytime soon, due to the extreme paucity of extant Linear B tablets and fragments (< 500), of which the vast majority are fragments, and thus ineffectual in providing any impetus to even a partial decipherment of Minoan Linear A. However, all is not lost. Far from it. There quite a few (almost) full intact Minoan Linear A tablets, all of which are very much more susceptible to contributing positively to at least a partial decipherment of Linear A. To date, the Linear A tablets which I have been able to decipher, more or less accurately, are HT 13, HT 14, (HT 17), HT 21, HT 31, HT 38, HT 91, HT 92, HT 94 and HT 132 (all from Haghia Triada) ZA 1 ZA 8 ZA 10 (Zakros) GO Wc 1 (Gournia) and the Troy spindle whorls I have also managed to decipher one or two words on several other tablets from Haghia Triada, Zakros and elsewhere, without however being able to decipher the remainder of the integral text, which utterly escapes me, and is therefore still to be considered undecipherable, at least for the time being. There is no telling whether or not either I myself or someone else will be able to decipher more words from the rest of these tablets or even some of the tablets entire in the near future. Only time will tell, but I believe the prospects are much better now than they were even a few months ago, i.e. prior to May 2016, when I embarked on the exciting journey to decipher as much of Minoan Linear A as I could. It is no small achievement, I believe, for me to have been able to decipher at least the 12 Linear A tablets listed above,if indeedmy decipherments approach cohesive accuracy,both internally and by means of cross-correlative regressive extrapolation from almost identical to similar Mycenaean Linear B tablets. With respect to my own decipherment of HT 13 (Haghia Triada) above, I wish to make the following highly pertinent observations. I leave it up to you to decide for yourself (yourselves) whether or not the assumptions I have meticulously made with specific reference to what appear to bederivationalstandard units of measurement in Minoan Linear A are in fact that. Immediately pursuant to my highly accurate decipherment of HT 31 (Haghia Triada) on vessels and pottery, for which Mycenaean Linear B tablet Pylos Py TA 641-1952 (Ventris) is the quasi Rosetta Stone (as I have re-iterated many times since that decipherment), I turned my attention to three words which appeared over and over on several Minoan Linear A tablets, these beingreza, adureza&tereza. Philologists such as Andras Zeke of the Minoan Language Blog had previously and consistently “deciphered” these three terms as beingtoponymsor place names, but I was immediately suspicious of such an interpretation, given that both adurezaand terezahave the prefixesaduandteprepended to what strikingly appears to be their ownroot,reza. Subsequent research revealed two more terms most likely derived from the root,reza= the standard unit of linear measurement in Minoan Linear A (as far as I can tell... more on this to come). These aredurezaandkireza. So the total number of terms relative to measurement of large, not minute, quantities in Minoan Linear A appear to be 5. That is quite a tally. + units of measurement in Minoan Linear A: exact values unknownreza= standard unit of measurement (linear)adureza= dry unit of measurement (something like a “bushel”)dureza= unit of measurement (unknown) [1]kireza= dry measurement for figs (a basket) [2]tereza= liquid unit of measurement (something like “a gallon” or at the bare minimum “a litre” [3] NOTES: [1] While I have been utterly unable to surmise what standard unit of measurementdurezais supposed to represent, even the standard units for reza, adureza&terezaare mere approximations. For more on this see the concluding paragraph of this post. [2] While I am virtually certain thatkirezais the standard unit for the measurement of abasketof figs, this still begs the question, what size is the basket? At any rate, it is pretty obvious that the basket size cannot be larger than can reasonably be carried on one shoulder, since that is the way baskets are carried in practically every culture, ancient or modern. So in this case, the approximation for the standard unit of measurement figs,kireza, is considerably more accurate than all of the others. [3] Obviously, in light of [1] above, my guesstimates for the standard units of dry and wet measurement (adurezaandterezarespectively) are just that, and nothing more. Now if we compare the variables in theprefixes to the,rootreza(adu, du, ki&te) with the similar practice ofsuffixes appendedto word roots in Mycenaean Linear B, which is the direct opposite practice we have just propounded for Minoan Linear A, we nevertheless discover that the same level of consistency and coherence applies equally to both languages, as clearly illustrated by the following table, in which the prefixes listed above for Minoan Linear A appear at the end, preceded by no fewer than three roots (which are invariable) and appear in front of highly variable suffixes in Mycenaean Linear B. The roots are, respectively,raw, which references anything to do with people,tri, which references anything related to the number 3 andwana, which references any connotation of kingship or royalty in Mycenaean Greek. While the practices for affixing are appositive in Minoan Linear A (which prepends affixes to the root) and in Mycenaean Linear B (which appends suffixes to the root or stem), the procedure the two languages follows is one and the same, flipped on its head either way you view it, i.e. from the perspective of Mycenaean Linear B orvice versa, from that of Minoan Linear A. The underlying principle which defines this procedure is, as propounded by my colleague and friend, Eugenio R. Luján. So let us simply call the procedure (whether from the perspective of Minoan Linear or its opposite in Mycenaean Linear B) just that, the cognitive frame, which is also the template for the procedure, actually proceeding forward in both languages, each in its own way. Either way, the procedure works like a charm. As Eugenio R. Luján so succinctly summarizes it in his article, “Semantic Maps and Word Formation: Agents, Instruments, and Related Semantic Roles”, inthe cognitive frameLinguistic Discovery(Dartmouth College), Vol 8, Issue 1, 2010. pp. 162-175, and I quote: ... The methodology of semantic maps has been applied mainly to the analysis of grammaticalmorphemes (affixes and adpositions) pg. 162 and again, Previous work on semantic maps has shown how the polysemy of grammatical morphemes isnotrandom, but structured according to underlying principles.... Although the semantic map methodology has not been applied to the analysis of word formation patterns, there is no reason to suppose that derivational morphemes behave differently from grammatical morphemes. In fact, taking into account the findings of the intensive work done in the field of grammaticalization in the last thirty years or so, we know now that lexical and grammatical morphemesconstitute a continuum, and their meanings are organized in the same way—inside a cognitive frame,... pg. 163 and most significantly, In contrast to the lexicon, the number of derivational morphemes and word formation patterns in any given language islimited. pg. 163. I wish to lay particular stress on this last observation by Eugenio R. Luján, because he is right on the money. In terms of the way I have expounded my own explanation of how the procedure ofthe cognitive frameworks, as I see it, what he is actually saying here is this: the derivational morphemes (i.e. the prefixes in Minoan Linear A and the suffixes in Mycenaean Linear B) is limited, and in factvery limitedin comparison with the orthographic and grammatical lexicon in either language, or for that matter, in any language, ancient or modern. All of this brings us full circle back to my own original assumption, namely, thatadureza, dureza, kirezaandterezaare all derivational morphemes ofrezain Minoan Linear A and that the suffixes appended to the rootsraw, triandwanain Mycenaean Linear B are also derivational morphemes. The gravest problem with the decipherment of HT 13 (Haghia Triada) advanced by Pavel Serafimov and Anton Perdih is that it doesnot take the cognitive frame or map of derivational morphemes into account at all. So instead, the authors advance entirely different meanings for each of these terms (reza, adureza, dureza, kireza&tereza), entirely oblivious to the the fact that they all share the sameroot,reza. This factor alone throws profound doubt on their decipherment. On the other hand, my own decipherment of HT 13 (Haghia Triada) takes the procedure of the cognitive frame or map of derivational morphemes fully into account, with the very same procedure applied to derivational morphemes in Mycenaean Linear B, though in the opposite direction). For the sake of consistency, let us refer to the the cognitive frame or map of derivational morphemes in Minoan Linear A asregressive, given that the variables (the prefixes,adureza, dureza, kireza&tereza) precede the root,reza, and the same frame asprogressivein Mycenaean Linear B, in light of the fact that the root or stem is followed by the variable suffixes (derivational morphemes). Be it as it may, prefixes and suffixes are both classed under the umbrella term,affixes, and again, I repeat, the procedure is the same either way. An affix is an affix is an affix, whether or not it comes first (prefix) or last (suffix). For this reason alone I am convinced that my decipherment of HT 13 is on the right track, even if it is not totally accurate... which it cannot be anyway, in light of the fact that the standard units of measurement for large quantities in Minoan Linear A(reza, adureza, dureza, kirezaandtereza) will never be known with any measure of accuracy, given that we can have no idea whatsoever that the “standard” units for anything in either Minoan Linear A or Mycenaean Linear B can ever be really determined. The farther we as philologists or historical linguists go back diachronistically in the historical timeline, the less determinable are units of measurement or, for that matter, different kinds of textiles or pottery, few of which we can know with any measure of certainty either in Minoan Linear A or Mycenaean Linear B.

# Tag: places

## 57 Linear A terms deciphered with fair probability from A Glossary of 126 Minoan Linear A words more or less accurately deciphered to date (the largest ever glossary of Linear A) accounting for 24.7 % of all intact Minoan Linear A terms in Prof. John G. Younger’s Linear A texts in phonetic transcription = 510

57Linear A terms deciphered with fair probability from A Glossary of126Minoan Linear A words more or less accurately deciphered to date (the largest ever glossary of Linear A) accounting for24.7 %of all intact Minoan Linear A terms in Prof. John G. Younger’sLinear A texts in phonetic transcription=510: All terms in Minoan Linear A and in Mycenaean Linear B have been Latinized for ease of access to persons not familiar with these syllabaries. NOTE that severalprefixes, internal syllabogramsorsuffixesinBOLDare shared among words. These are obviously related to one another. adaro = barley = Linear Bkiritaadu = so much, so many, all (persons, things, esp. grain/wheat), referencing all accounts relevant to them. In the case of grains & wheat, adu would refer to all the “ bushel-like” units of wheat accounted for. In the case of the men measuring the wheat, it would appear that they are surveyors or comptrollers. Cf. Linear B,toso, tosa. adureza= unit of dry measurement (grain, wheat, barley, flour) akipiete = (in) common, shared, allotted, allotment = Cf. Linear Bkekemena ktoina= small plot of land asasumaise = cattle-driver or shepherd = Linear Bqoukoro-or-qorokotadatara= figs overseer -or- fig gathererdatu = small olives See also qatidate = olive trees = Linear B erawa dikise = a type of cloth = Linear B any number of types of cloth dumitatira2 (dumitatirai) = right or inner spindle wheel on one side of the distaff kapa = follower or (foot) solder = Linear Beqetakidata = to be accepted (for delivery to) = Linear Bdekesatokidema*323na = type of vessel (truncated on HT 31)kireta2 (kiritai) = delivery = Linear Bapudosiskiretana = (having been) delivered (past participle passive) = Linear Bamoiyetokireza= unit of measurement for figs, probably 1 basket kiro = owed = Linear Boporo= they owed kukani = (deep) red wine Cf. Linear Bwono mitowesakura = large amount of wine = Linear Bpithos+ wono?mitu = a type of cloth nasi = a type of cloth nipa3 (nipai) or nira2 (nirai) = figs = Linear Bsuzapajare = in pay, hired = Linear B emito pimitatira2 (pimitatirai) = left or outer spindle wheel on one side of the distaff pitakase = harvested or field of = Linear Bakoroqajo = double-edged axe or labrys = Linear Bdapuqatidate = olive trees See also datu = small olives = Linear B erawo qareto = Linear Bonato= “lease field” ra*164ti = approx. 5 litres (of wine)reza= 1 standard unit of measurement sajamana = with handles = Linear Bowowesamaro = bunch of (figs, grapes etc.) sara2 (sarai) = small unit of measurement: dry approx. 1 kg., liquid approx. 1 litre saru = large olives sata = a type of cloth tejare = a type of cloth teki = small unit of measurement for wine @ 27 1/2 per tereza tereza= larger unit of liquid measurement (olive oil, wine) teri = offering -or- being delivered (to the gods) = Linear Bdedomena, dosomo, qetea(due to the gods) tesi = small unit of measurement tisa = description of pot or pottery = Linear Bamotewiya/yoti?redu = spice(s) (coriander) udimi = a type of cloth usu = a type of cloth Eponyms: Ikurina Kosaiti Kukudara Kuramu Kureju Makarita Mirutarare Qetiradu Qitune Sidate Toponyms: Almost all the toponyms do not require decipherment as they are either identical or almost identical in Mycenaean Linear B: Dame Dawa (Haghia Triada) Dureza(or a unit of measurement) Qeka COMMENTARY: This Glossary accounts for at least24.7 %of all intact Minoan Linear A terms. There are57terms deciphered with a medium degree of certainty, i.e. probability(60 % to 75 %). These terms thus account for45 %of all Minoan Linear A terms I have attempted to decipher. They also account for10 %of all intact Minoan Linear A terms in Prof. John G. Younger’s Lexicon. As for eponyms and toponyms, I can only claim to have deciphered no more than10 %, since they are so obvious and since so many of them are almost identical to their Mycenaean Linear B counterparts, in those cases where the latter exist. All of my decipherments operate onThe principle of cross-correlative cohesionon the assumption that terms in Minoan Linear A vocabulary should reflect as closely and as faithfully as possible parallel terms in Mycenaean Greek vocabulary. In other words,the English translations of Minoan words in a Minoan Linear A Glossary such as this one should look as if they are English translations of Mycenaean Greek terms in a Linear B glossary. I have endeavoured to do my best to achieve this goal, but even the most rational and logical approach, such as I take, does not and cannot guarantee reciprocity between Minoan Linear A and Mycenaean Linear B terms. It is precisely for this reason that I have had to devise ascale of relative accuracyfor terms in this Linear A Glossary. The best and most reliableLinear B Lexiconis that by Chris Tselentis, Athens, Greece. If you wish to receive a copy of his Lexicon, please leave a comment in Comments, with some way for me to get in touch with you.

## Minoan Linear A terms deciphered with a high degree of certainty thus account for 37 % of all Minoan Linear A terms I have attempted to decipher. They also account for 9 % of all intact Minoan Linear A terms

A Glossary of126Minoan Linear A words more or less accurately deciphered to date (the largest ever glossary of Linear A) accounting for at least24.7 %of all intact Minoan Linear A terms in Prof. John G. Younger?s Linear A Liner A texts in phonetic transcription =510.Terms deciphered with a high degree of certainty thus account for37 %of all Minoan Linear A terms I have attempted to decipher. They also account for9 %of all intact Minoan Linear A terms in Prof. John G. Younger’s: That is a pretty good return. All terms in Minoan Linear A and in Mycenaean Linear B have been Latinized for ease of access to persons not familiar with these syllabaries. aka = wineskin (two syllabograms overlaid) akii = garlic darida = large vase daropa = stirrup jar = Linear B karawere daweda = medium size amphora with two handles 5 ditamana = dittany (medicinal herb) kanaka = saffron = Linear B kanako karopa3 (karopai) = kylix (with two handles & smaller than a pithos) keda = cedar kidema*323na = type of vessel (truncated on HT 31)10 kireta2 (kiritai) = delivery = Linear Bapudosiskiretana = (having been) delivered (past participle passive) = Linear Bamoiyetokiro = owed = Linear Boporo= they owed kuro = total kuruku = crocus 15 maru = wool (syllabograms superimposed) = Linear Bmari/marenere = larger amphora size orada = rose pazeqe = small handle-less cups = Linear Bdipa anowe, dipa anowotopuko = tripod = Linear Btiripode(100 %certain) 20 qapa3 = qapai = large handle-less vase or amphora quqani = medium size or smaller amphora ra2ri = rairi = lily sajamana = with handles = Linear Bowowesedina = celery 25 supa3 (supai) = small cup = Linear Bdipa mewiyosupu = very large amphora tarawita = terebinth tree 28 Eponyms: Adunitana Akaru 30 Asiyaka Danekuti Daqera Ikurina Makarita 35 Mirutarare Qetiradu Sirumarita2 = Sirumaritai Turunuseme Watumare 40 Toponyms: Almost all the toponyms do not require decipherment as they are either identical or almost identical in Mycenaean Linear B: Akanu = Archanes (Crete) Dikate = Mount Dikte Idaa = Mount Ida Idunesi Kato = (Linear BZakoro)45 Kudoni = Kydonia Meza (= Linear BMasa)Paito= Phaistos ( =Linear B) Radu = Lato (= Linear BRato) Setoiya (= Linear BSeteia) 50 Sukirita/Sukiriteija = Sybrita Winadu = Linear BInato52 COMMENTARY: This Glossary accounts for at least24.7 %of all intact Minoan Linear A terms. There are45terms deciphered with a high degree of certainty (> 75 %). These terms thus account for37 %of all Minoan Linear A terms I have attempted to decipher. They also account for9 %of all intact Minoan Linear A terms in Prof. John G. Younger’s Lexicon. As for eponyms and toponyms, I can only claim to have deciphered no more than10 %, since they are so obvious and since so many of them are almost identical to their Mycenaean Linear B counterparts, in those cases where the latter exist. All of my decipherments operate onThe principle of cross-correlative cohesionon the assumption that terms in Minoan Linear A vocabulary should reflect as closely and as faithfully as possible parallel terms in Mycenaean Greek vocabulary.In other words, the English translations of Minoan words in a Minoan Linear A Glossary such as this one should look as if they are English translations of Mycenaean Greek terms in a Linear B glossary.I have endeavoured to do my best to achieve this goal, but even the most rational and logical approach, such as I take, does not and cannot guarantee reciprocity between Minoan Linear A and Mycenaean Linear B terms. It is precisely for this reason that I have had to devise a scale of relative accuracy for terms in this Linear A Glossary. The best and most reliableLinear B Lexiconis that by Chris Tselentis, Athens, Greece. If you wish to receive a copy of his Lexicon, please leave a comment in Comments, with some way for me to get in touch with you.

## A Minoan Linear A tablet from Archanes, Crete with the toponym Akanu

A Minoan Linear A tablet from Archanes, Crete with the toponymAkanu: Here we have a Minoan Linear A tablet from Archanes, Crete with the toponymAkanu= modern day Archanes. This is Linear A term101in our Glossary of Minoan Linear A.

## Proof-positive confirmation that Mycenaean Linear B = Minoan Linear A Paito, pre-Greek for Phaistos

Proof-positive confirmation that Mycenaean Linear B = Minoan Linear APaito, pre-Greek for Phaistos: The illustration above of Mycenaean Linear B tablet KN 36 K c 33 and Minoan Linear A tablet HT 116 (Haghia Triada) confirms beyond a shadow of a doubt that Mycenaean Linear B = Minoan Linear APaitofor Phaistos, which is definitely pre-Greek and possibly even pre-Minoan. Unless the Minoan language is Indo-European (which no-one knows), thenPaito= Phaistos maynotbe Indo-European.Paito,which is one of the first terms we introduced in our Minoan Linear A Glossary, does not require decipherment. It is100%accurate, bang on the mark.

You must be logged in to post a comment.