Tãbliþele de la Tãrtãria

Ce spuneți despre imaginea de mai jos?
Este oare una de tip  Vinca?

Am prelucrat imaginea (ridicat contrast) astfel încât sã se vadã mai bine semnele.

nu este din Pen Balcanică.Pare a fi din Orient.

Îmi cer scuze dacă s-a mai vorbit despre asta și nu am observat eu.

Nu credeți că tăblițele de la Tărtăria ar putea fi niște amulete?

florrea2, on 21 octombrie 2012 - 16:09, said:

Zona Mãrii Adriatice.
Insula San Domino.

Seamana foarte mult cu statuetele razboinicilor sarzi.
Am cateva reproductii la mine acasa,par a fi expresia civilizatiei nuragice.

Edited by marcuzzzo, 21 October 2012 - 17:47.

marcuzzzo, on 21 octombrie 2012 - 17:46, said:

Probabil.
Însă cred că acele semne nu își au locul acolo.
E posibil să fie un fel de compilație.
Cineva o fi crezut că ”dă bine”.

Ceea ce mie mi-a atras atenția este o relativă asemănare a simbolurilor acelea cu unele caracteristice culturilor vinca (in care sunt incadrate si cele de la Tărtăria).
Mă rog, e posibil ca aceste simboluri să fie oarecum ”universale”, dar parcă prea seamănă.   Cel puțin aș mi se pare mie.

Apropo, am recitit topicul de la început.
Aș vrea să-i întreb pe colegii care susțin că acestea ar fi niște falsuri, dacă de la momentul postării și până acum și-au schimbat opinia.

Cultura Nuragica: statuiile razboinicilor sarzi

[ http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/Bronz.sardo.JPG/472px-Bronz.sardo.JPG - Pentru incarcare in pagina (embed) Click aici ]




[ http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Bronzetto_sardo_1.JPG/384px-Bronzetto_sardo_1.JPG - Pentru incarcare in pagina (embed) Click aici ]

CELE 2 SEMNE ALE CADRANULUI SITUAT ÎN STG. SUS PE TABLITA ROTUNDA DE LA TARTARIA SANT LITERE
MARII SAVANTI AI LUMII INCA SE INTREABA DACA PE TABLITA AVEM PROTO SCRIERE AU IDEOGRAME AU SCRIERE EVENTUAL

vezi semnul H,He "eta-heta-e-he-h cu 3 bare-heta ala scala"
http://upload.wikime..._Eta_08.svg.png    
http://www.google.ro...29,r:6,s:0,i:85

vezi semnul D folosit initial ba pentru d ba pentru R http://upload.wikime...t_Varianten.png
http://www.codex99.c.../greek_sign.gif

Edited by eugenrau, 27 October 2012 - 22:41.

Ce părere aveţi?

semne pe tablita de la Tartaria in sfertul situat in stanga-sus
HDsau HP?   +++++
DDoo
litere
HR   S(x?)
R R o o
citire:
(HoR..?) HeR,,..   SeRROU/SuRRou/Surros/syros

D O C U M E N T A R E mare atentie !

1.Syros insulă în Ciclade a carui nume cica vine din fen. usyr fericit,

Queen of the Cyclades  http://www.gogreece....sroom/syros.htm

According to mythology, the first inhabitant of Syros was Coeranus, who arrived on a dolphin after his ship sank near Paronaxia (dolphins seem to be very good about rescuing sailors). If Coeranus was a Phoenician, then the myth may be true. Archeologists say the first to settle this island were probably sailors from Phoenicia, a coastal land that once was where Lebanon and Syria are now. The name of the island comes from the Phoenician word "usyra" meaning happy or from "syr" meaning rock (the island is very rocky). It was a long journey from Phoenicia to Syros, much farther than our trip, but the Phoenicians were great sailors. In very ancient times their ships controlled the trade routes.

2.de fapt zic eu de la USAR numele egipt. al lui Osiris (Osiris fiul lui Hor)


3. Hor <>Heracles (ambii eroi primordiali ca si Hor Osiris)

4.ZEUS=SEYR ??

• Din sci.lang: Re: Did the Trojan war really happen the way Homer said it ...
  
  sci.tech-archive.net › Archive › sci.lang › 2004-07Cached
  13 Jul 2004 – be understood as the sun, shining on the male head or king and the ear of grain ... The peculiar name Seyr for Zeus may have a correspondence in the Hittite ... well worthy of Zeus, who was the supreme Greek god already in ...
  
  5. SEIR=SOARE  ??
  
• Din AncientBibleHistory : Message: Re: Seir = The Sun
  
  dir.groups.yahoo.com/group/.../message/8177?o=1... - United StatesCached
  You +1'd this publicly. Undo
  25 Aug 2001 – Please respond to the idea that "Seir = Sun".... that's all I really ... Sirius was the name of the dog that accompanied the Greek Hero > Orion!
  
  6. eugenrau seir=seiros=xeros=ca si xerox=uscator=a fost aplicat in vechime atat pentru soare cat si pentru sirius
  
  Sirius www.constellationsofwords.com/stars/Sirius.html Various early Greek authors used it for our Sirius, perhaps generally as an ... in its forms seir, seiros, and seirios, — Suidas used all three for both sun and star, ...
  

7. Inscripţie
http://www.britishmu...k_of_syros.aspx
There is also a Greek inscription identifying the dead man as Syros, son of a man called Herakles.
nota.Nu este nici un personaj real syros sau heracles sant probabil syros=sirius,soare? si heracles zeitati !!!

8.Langa tablitele de la Tartaria s-a gasit o statueta faceless fara fata in maniera cicladica, apoi s-a mai gasit o bratara din scoica spondylus care creste numai in Mediterana
Originea scrisului daca nu si a tablitelor pare a fi asa cum am spus probabil in postarea anterioara Marea Egee (Cyclade sau Creta)

9. Am putea avea si asa
HeRa      SURRoo/SuRRouSuRu (citeste suru)
hera gr. "lady of the house"= "doamna"....  surou "of Syros"="din Syros" (=Siros,insula Siros)

10. Vezi Indo European radacina sur, suria <viza> Hor
vezi.

• 
  
  
  The common origin of the God's names Yahweh (Jehovah) and Zeus
  
  www.garshin.ru › Linguistics › Comparativistics
  You +1'd this publicly. Undo
  About an opportunity of the Indo-European origins of the Bible names. ... probably, "sun-similar", which on Indo-Arian Could sound as Suria-man "the solar person" .... occurs from a Indo-Aryan root sur - "sun") or in headstream Euphrates (this ...
  
  
  
  
  
  Din Xur/bel/gon - The Human Speech Formula - By Dušan Vukotić
  
  dacia.org/forum.php?...forum_id=5...id...
  You +1'd this publicly. Undo
  Altfel la baza numelui pentru soare pare că stă XUR sau KUR din care au derivat atît HOR cît şi SUR din Suria/Svar. ...
  <<Slovenians (Sur-Bel-Gon), are closely related to the ancient sun deities. ... HOR.... Both " yahweh" and "sabaoth" are Indo-European words; "el/elohim" is a ...>>

Edited by eugenrau, 28 October 2012 - 00:42.

• 11. gr. soros "pit,grave" ="groapa,mormant" lat. si traca siros "groapa,siloz" (latin siros>silos=rom. "siloz") sp. horreus :"siloz,hambar" de fapt vine tot de la de la uscare,"uscator"

Cei mai mari oameni de ştiinţă ai planetei nu pot spune nici măcar dacă pe tăbliţele este sau nu scriere.
Eu am 100 de argumente că este scriere.
Ia vedeţi semnele prezente în sfertul situat în stânga-sus pe tăbliţa rotundă de la Tărtăria.
Sânt semnele HP sau HD unde H-ul este în forma sa arhaică (feniciana ebraică chet,heth şi în greaca arhaică heta sau eta)

1.
Reconsidering the “Hera-Pottery” from the Samian Heraion and its Distribution
Amalia Avramidou
https://www.academia...ida._CReA_-_ULB
The so-called Hera-mugs are usually of white color with red details on rim, handle and foot, andmost carry one of the following dipinti: HPH, HP, PH indicating they are property of the goddess.................). The mugs are rather talland well-proportioned, and usually carry the HR dipinto left of the handle.
2.
http://www.theaprici...d-to-them/page2
Alsószentmihály inscription
The inscription on a building stone was found in Mihai Viteazu, Cluj (Transylvania, today Romania). Alsószentmihály located on the territory of the late Province Dacia existed up to the middle of the 3rd century. Dénes showed that the Khavars (Khazar rebels joined the Hungarians in the 9th century[1]) probably settled in this region (that time Transylvania).[2] In some parts of Hungary, there are data of the Khavars even from the 13th century.[3]
http://en.wikipedia....rat_fenykep.png

Surorile tãblițelor de la Tãrtãria, descoperite la Vadu Rãu.

http://adevaruldespr...-la-vadu-rau-2/

Aveti aici multe raspunsuri la intrebarile Dv.:
https://tartariawriting.blogspot.com
https://tartariatabletswordpress.com
www.tartariatablets.com      sau tastati in caseta Google:
  eugenrau tartaria tablets

Edited by eugenrau, 26 June 2018 - 23:05.

1. Nu ai scris linkurile corect
2. Al doilea site e gol.
3. Ma doare creierul uitandu-ma la calitatea limbii engleze folosite pe site-ul blogspot. Te rog, nu o macelari doar pentru ca vrei sa-ti exprimi trairile lingvistice.
4. Daca vrei sa faci ceva profesionist, renunta la treaba cu site-uri gratuite, fa un site propriu, vindeca textul de greseli si construieste-i o forma citibila. Insiruirea alandala e tipic site-urilor conspirationiste. Te invata in facultate cum sa faci un eseu stiintific!

Iaca pe unde are Soros stramosi.
SNCR.

Alexandru H., on 27 iunie 2018 - 13:22, said:

Multumesc pt. observatii.Da-mi un mic exemplu relativ la calitatea limbii, observat in mod repetat, ca sa realizez mai bine, ceva Pe ce platforme i-mi indicati sa fac un site propriu & platit?

WestPoint, on 27 iunie 2018 - 13:26, said:

?? SNCR ???

turcoctonul, on 08 ianuarie 2012 - 22:13, said:

Eu zic ca gresit sant atribuite culturii Vinca.Au putut fi datate doar oasele gasite undeva pe langa (6.200 B.C.)In mod eronat s-a atribuit aceeasi varsta tablitelor.Varsta tablitelor nu mai poate fi determ.cu metoda C14 intrucat tablitele au fost arse in cuptor.
Apoi proto-scriere ( scriere folosind semne proto-cuneiforme) nu exista nicaieri in lume inainte de 3.500 BC.
Apoi scriere nu exista nicaieri in lume inainte de 2800-3000B.C.
In rest sant perfect de acord cu dumneata.Observatii mai mult decat pertinente si corecte !

turcoctonul, on 08 ianuarie 2012 - 22:13, said:

Eu zic ca gresit sant atribuite culturii Vinca.Au putut fi datate doar oasele gasite undeva pe langa 6.200 B.C.In mod eronat s-a atribuit aceasta varsta tablitelor.Varsta tablitelor nu mai poate fi determ.cu metoda C14 intrucat tablitele au fost arse in cuptor.
Apoi proto-scriere ( scriere folosind semne proto-cuneiforme) nu exista nicaieri in lume inainte de 3.500 BC.
Apoi scriere nu exista nicaieri in lume inainte de 2800-3000B.C.

turcoctonul, on 08 ianuarie 2012 - 22:13, said:

Nu cred ca apartin culturii Vinca si nici nu au varsta 6200BC.
Doar oasele gasite undeva pe langa au varsta 6200BC.Varsta tablitelir nu mai poate fi determinata intrucat au fost arse in cuptor.Astfel dupa mine pot avea orice varsts cuprinsa intre anii 3.000BC si 1960 AC

Mount_Yermom, on 21 decembrie 2011 - 16:30, said:

Dupa aproape 12 ani de munca (atentie, legata strict de semne/scris !) concluziile mele converg la aceeasi idee.

Edited by eugenrau, 03 November 2018 - 00:23.

lupu2, on 21 decembrie 2011 - 18:36, said:

-Cultura Vinca a produs enorm de multe semne.Din pacate chiar cand se apropia de punctul de a descoperi proto-scrierea, pe la 3000-2500 BC  a disparut, s-a metamorfozat si a fost inlocuita cu alte culturi.Posibil in legatura cu venirea Indo-Europenilor peste pelasgi.
-tablitele sant unicate.Pentru un cititor neavizat altele ar fi asemanatoare,dar nu sant.
-Tablitele ar putea fi exemplul perfect de evolutie al scrierii,in sensul ca fiecare reprezinta o etapa evolutiva.Apoi scribul care sa scrie in 3 sisteme simultan nu s-a nascut.Dar ar putea un profesor universitar si in ultima instanta chiar eu.
1.tablita (dreptunghiulara cu caprita):limbaj pur pictografic.
2.Tablita dreptunghiulara cu gaura: prezinta ideograme/logograme, (si posibil silabograme)
3.cea rotunda:prezinta silabograme (sau chiar litere in jumatatea de sus)

lupu2, on 21 decembrie 2011 - 18:36, said:

-Cultura Vinca a produs enorm de multe semne.Din pacate chiar cand se apropia de punctul de a descoperi proto-scrierea, pe la 3000-2500 BC  a disparut, s-a metamorfozat si a fost inlocuita cu alte culturi.Posibil in legatura cu venirea Indo-Europenilor peste pelasgi.
-tablitele sant unicate.Pentru un cititor neavizat altele ar fi asemanatoare,dar nu sant.
-Tablitele ar putea fi exemplul perfect de evolutie al scrierii,in sensul ca fiecare reprezinta o etapa evolutiva.Apoi scribul care sa scrie in 3 sisteme simultan nu s-a nascut.Dar ar putea un profesor universitar si in ultima instanta chiar eu.
1.tablita (dreptunghiulara cu caprita):limbaj pur pictografic.
2.Tablita dreptunghiulara cu gaura: prezinta ideograme/logograme, (si posibil silabograme)
3.cea rotunda:prezinta silabograme (sau chiar litere in jumatatea de sus)

florrea2, on 10 ianuarie 2012 - 15:59, said:

Dupa definitie faza in care se folosesc pictograme si/sau un numar relativ redus de semne(proto-cuneiforme,cca 900-1509,predecesoarele semnelor cuneiforme) se numeste proto-scriere.Nu este scriere propriu-zisa pt.ca nu poate exprima ceva exact asa cum pot cuvintele.
Faza in care prin semne se reproduc sunetele unei limbi este scriere propriu-zisa.La scrierea propriu-zisa se foloseste un numar mai mare de semne care au devenit mai complexe ca forma, dar la origine provin din cele proti-cuneiforme.Pot fi atat de schimbate incat se pirde(uita) complet sensul semnului de la care s-a plecat.

Morosanul, on 10 ianuarie 2012 - 16:40, said:

Exemplu de proto-scriere sumeriana care are 4 semne
-numarul 3 dis dis dis (1,1,1)
-semnul pt oaie "ud" cerc cu cruce in el
-Semnul pt casa/templu Ab
-semnul zeitei Inana
Din aceste semne cineva ia cunostinta de elementele mentionate, dar nu poate deduce cine a dat si cine a primit,daca au fost sacrificate oile sau datorie, samd.

florrea2, on 11 ianuarie 2012 - 22:54, said:

In neolitic 6500-2500BC nu mai erau vanatori-culegatori.Cica agricultura a fost introdusa dinspre Orient de 2 valuri migrationiste:unul pe la 7.000 BC si al 2-lea nu mai tin minte parca 4.000BC.

porphyrogenitus, on 13 ianuarie 2012 - 10:16, said:

Corect! Discutabile dar in lipsa unor dovezi sa nu renuntam in a le considera autentice.In felul lor tablitele de la Tartaria sant sigur autentice in sensul ca totusi cineva s-a muncit sa le inscriptioneze !

Din https://www.reddit.c...ntent=post_body
    Dating & Controversy:

Immediately, the tablets were taken to the Cluj Museum where they were baked for preservation. Unfortunately, this meant that they couldn’t be dated through carbon 14 or Isotopic chronology. Why was this done? In an unfortunate example of the many invasive archaeological procedures of the past, the soft tablets were mistakenly believed to be covered with damaging calcium—in reality, their clay mixture contained calcium, and when cleaned with a hydrochloric acid treatment and baked, their surface coating was removed and internal structure destroyed. Because of this, a controversial form of stratigraphy was used to date the tablets instead of carbon 14, the results of which were considered completely unreliable.

In the years since, other digs in Tartaria have unearthed artifacts believed to be from the same period and originating around 2700 BC. Tartaria is also close to several other important Neolithic sites such as Turdas and Alba Iulia-Lumea Noua. If the tablets were from the same time, they would predate the first known writing system in Europe from the Minoan Civilization, and, as more radiocarbon dating was performed on nearby sites, archaeologists came to believe that the tablets might date from even earlier, as far back as 5500 BC. If this was the case, then the tablets’ writing would predate the Sumerian cuneiform, long believed to be the world’s first, and Egyptian hieroglyphs, as well as Cretan Linear A, ancient Indus script, and Proto-Elamite script.This would be an incredible discovery, and change everything we know about the origins of writing... but detractors emerged immediately, for a variety of reasons, claiming that:

The Tablets Were Incorrectly Dated:
With the inability to use carbon 14 dating on the Tartaria Tablets, some said that there could be nothing definitive determined about their origins. Although there were artifacts found that might be from a similar time period, it’s not necessarily enough to correctly date the tablets. If the tablets were incorrectly dated, and are really from much later, then they could very well be a writing system or a copy of a more advanced civilization’s writing system. Either way, it wouldn’t be particularly special. Curiously, although many point to the age of the bones (circa 5300 BC) found with the tablets as evidence of the tablets’ age, at least one archaeologist believes that the bones could be those of a venerated elder passed down through generations, making them older than the tablets. In addition, there is some debate over the exact location of the pit, as Vlassa was strangely unforthcoming; all reports by Vlassa contained neither the pit's location nor the circumstances of the dig. If the tablets came from elsewhere then in the location they were found, they could have been surrounded by artifacts far older than they were.

The Tablets Were a Hoax:
For reasons I can’t find anywhere, Nicolae Vlassa has always been unwilling to discuss how he found the tablets and the circumstances of his dating procedures. Because of this, and the incredible implications of this discovery, some feel that these tablets are nothing but a forgery. Much of this speculation comes from the similarities the tablets' symbols bear to Sumerian symbols; their civilization of origin would have had no contact with the Sumerians, and these symbols especially resembled Sumerian symbols published in Romanian literature during the 1960s. Some also point to the lack of similar tablets found in the area. Detractors of this theory, however, claim that any similarities are nothing but superficial; a symbol for a cow will look similar no matter where it comes from. Some also believe that the tablets are authentic, but came from another place and time period; As far as I can tell (I do not speak Romanian), there are rumors in archaeological circles that Vlassa did not find the tablets in the pit, but rather in the basement of the Cluj Museum, in a box of findings by the Baroness Zsofia von Torma at the nearby—and much later—Neolithic site Turdas. This would certainly explain why the tablets were so foolishly treated in a way that would prevent proper dating. Vlassa also took only one picture of the pit from which the tablets were recovered, and took no pictures of any of the artifacts within.

The Tablets Were Art:
To some, all of this speculation takes these tablets too seriously, when it’s just as likely that these tablets were nothing but artwork, or even doodles. It would not have been uncommon for people of this time period to make pictograms, and experts have pointed to the sloppy, almost haphazard, line-work on the tablets.

The Tablets Were Ritual Objects:
Because the tablets were buried with what are believed to be the bones of a priestess, one of the most popular theories is that they were ritual objects, inscribed with religious symbols whose purpose was to store religious knowledge. According to this theory, the linear organization of the symbols represented ritual steps, and the two tablets with holes could be worn around the participants’ necks while the other could be kept in the hand. Much of this speculation comes from the belief that the humanoid figure, who has alternatively been identified as a hunter in furs or a shepherd, is a character on a throne pointing at a tree of life. Some also posit that the symbols were runes meant to give the owner power or luck. Unfortunately, the age and condition of the tablets make the symbols difficult to make out.

The Tablets Weren’t Quite Writing:
This one is a little bit more complicated, and I am not a linguist. The gist of it as I understand it is that some archaeologists believe that the tablets don’t represent a full writing system, but rather the precursor to one. This is called proto-writing, which describes early writing-adjacent systems based on earlier traditions of symbol systems. Though they have characteristics similar to writing, they cannot be classified as writing. Some of the difficulty in identification here comes from the fact that linguists don’t always agree on when a system transitions from proto-writing to writing. If the Tartaria tablets were part of a proto-writing system, they, while still significant, would be far from the first.

Despite these arguments, a small number of archaeologists hold that the Tartaria Tablets are a fully fledged writing system. There is certainly evidence to support this; the symbols are standardized, are comparable to other early writing systems, and are arranged in a row. Each symbol is also believed to represent something specific, with one meaning for each symbol, which again suggests a writing system.

If the tablets are correctly dated, are real, and are evidence of a writing system, this would make the Tartaria Tablets far older than the oldest known writing system—but questions remain over what kind of writing system they show, and for which group of people; some believe that they are part of the Danubian Civilization on the Danube River valley, considered the first agrarian society in central and eastern Europe. Others think that the tablets may have been made by people from the Vinca C migrations from proto-Sumerian civilizations.

But the Danubian Civilization theory presents another problem—if these tablets do indeed date from this period, why would they need a writing system at this time? All of the first known writing systems evolved out of a need for record-keeping in organized societies. Since no evidence of organized states exists here, they would likely have no real need for writing. This might mean that the tablets are newer, associating them with more modern examples of Danubian script dated thousands of years later. As some critics of this theory have noted, however, some later writing systems like Chinese characters were first used for “ritual and commemorative purposes” rather than record-keeping, and this writing system could be the same. Recent discoveries have supported this conclusion, as many artifacts have been uncovered with similar symbols throughout the Balkans, though most date from far later.

Final Thoughts & Questions:

In the decades since their discovery, several people have claimed to have “deciphered” the Tartaria Tablets—claims that are dubious at best—but the tablets are still being studied and the area they were discovered is still being excavated. Hopefully, as archaeological techniques continue to advance, we’ll have an answer one day. If the Tartaria Tablets are ever confirmed in both age and purpose, our knowledge of language and human development will be forever changed.

Are the Tartaria Tablets authentic?
If so, are they meaningless scribbles, art, religious objects, proto-writing, or writing? Or are they something else entirely?
Are the tablets correctly dated? Are they, then, the world's oldest writing system?
Honestly, I found researching this quite difficult. Again, I’m not a linguist nor am I an archaeologist, and the number of contradictions that exist for this case are astronomical—the bones, for example, were said by various sources to be those of a man, a woman, a priest, a ritual sacrifice, a person who died in a fire, a victim of cannibalism, or a warrior. Sources even disagree over whether the bones were burned at all. And for so many contradictions, there were surprisingly few sources discussing this (at least in English). So, I apologize for any inaccuracies or mistakes. On a lighter note, I didn’t quite realize how much archaeologists argued over findings on a personal level until I looked into this. Because they do. A lot. My personal favorite was when one called another “childish and dishonest” for disagreeing over whether the two tablets with holes were used in conjunction.

!!!!!     tartariatablets.com    !!!!

Edited by eugenrau, 17 September 2021 - 20:07.