Istoria scrisului.Tăblițele de la Tărtăria.

matale nu pricepi bine romînește, Zenovius. Eu le-m făcut pe cele mai ușoare. Am deschis drumul. Îmi dau seama ce muncă mă așteaptă dacă mai continui. Pt ce să o fac?
Metoda nu am descoperit-o eu. E descoperită de mult, dar eu am observat în lucrările celor ce  au încercat textul de pe inel sau cele de pe plăci că nu o aplică, ceea ce  înseamnă că nici nu o cunosc.
Tu crezi că dacă știe cineva metoda o să descifreze textele. E fals. Le poate descifra dacă are și experiență în descifrări. Nu arăți cuiva cum se joacă fotbal și gata acela o să joace și încă bine. Trebuie exercițiu și după aia multă muncă.
Plăcile nu sînt scrise exact la fel pt că nici nu avea cum să fie un sistem unitar de scris. Dacă într-un loc se spunea .....ĂNAÎNCEA DU ARMĂSA de ex în altul se pute spune ĂNAÎNCEA TIĂ  ARMĂSA...sau DIĂ ARMĂSA, , plus altele pe care nu le mai scriu că tot nu te prea interesează.

mirceavoda, on 14th February 2011, 08:38, said:

Mare atenție, sânt 3 tăblițe,
-una este dreptunghiulară, fără gaură folosește pictograme, limbaj pictografic.Pictogramele sânt a) o capră,ied b)un motiv vegetal,ramură, plantă c) nu știe nimeni să spună exact ce reprezintă,fiecare uice altceva, ca și cu desenele lui Bulă
-una dreptunghiulară, cu gaură,care prezintă semne.Pentru majoritatea cercetătorilor sînt iconuri,ideograme,hieroglife și o parte  spun că reprezintă o proto scriere iar altă parte scriere,dar nedescifrată.
-Cea rotundă prezintă iar semne.Pentru o parte acolo este proto scriere. Pentru altă parte acolo este scriere.Pe aceasta au fixație cercetătorii, în majoritate asta însemnând peste jumătate spun că este oscriere necunoscută.
Acele semne pot fi ideograme, pentru că se vede că nu sântpictograme adică să reprezinte o capră,pește,munte,om, darpot fi și semne similare scrierilor egeenelinear A și linear B.
Nu știu prea bine de unde să apuce semnele și unde să le încadreze. Scriere silabică, cum este linear B, unde fiecare semn reprezintă o silabă, cumeste semnul Ja postat pentru MirceaVodă de zi că-i gard sadea.
EU AM GĂSIT CEA MAI MARE PARTE A SEMNELOR,CARE  CULMEA AU FOST FOLOSITE ÎN MAI MULTE FELURI DE SCRIERE ÎN EUROPA.
VĂ POT ARĂTA FIECARE SEMN ÎNPARTE PREZENT FIECARE ÎN CEL PUȚIN 3 SCRIERI(tipuri de scrieri sau alfabete)
Mai delicat este cu 3 semne, și anume,
- Semnul +++++ , care îmi dă unele dificultăți.
1.Așa, cu 5 bare l-am găsit în Sumer,eventual Egipt șiacolo reprezintă Se, iar ca noțiue sămânță,cereale.
Altfel mai există 2 posibilități
2-Să fie reprezentată un număr, cum ar  xxxxx al romanilor care înseamnă 10-10-10-10-10 adică 50, aprox. vîrsta ăleia cu oaselecolea.Vîrsta det. deantropologi 50-55 ani.
3-Există litere în alfabete,inclusiv în Europa unde ++apareficurat atât așa cât și la rotitla 90 grade,reprez. la unii Z, la alții X adică Csi.  Dar dacă ++++  poate fi ZZ,noi din păcate avem o bară înplus +++++.
Grupul de semne cu aspect de hieroglife prezent în cadranul situat îndreapta-jos.

Tocmai prin prezența lor și aspectul de hieroglife,derutează,zăpăcesc și încurcă TOTAL privitorul.

Înafara faptului că semnul din dreapta l-am găsit ca reprezentând lăcașul,templul soarelui, apoi în alt loc am găsit același semn ASTARTE,

Eu am luat în considerare posibiitatea ca din considerente de neexplicat, au făcut semnele ca egiptenii, adică au pus unele peste altele semne obișnuite.
Ca să înțelegeți, este ca și cum ați lua niște litere de tipar din carton și să le puneți unele peste altele (3 unul peste altul+3 unul peste altul).Atfel puteți obține ceeace este acolo-
Exemplu semnul din st. format (luat de sus înjos) din E,V,C
apoiceldin dreapta format din C,L,Delta(triunghi)
Atenție
Lumea semnelor folosite pentru scris în lume este de fapt un univers în sine.Vă recomand să vă familiarizați ca să putem discuta cel puțin cu literele din alfabetele arhaice grecești.Puneți în google,cu opțiunea imagine
"greek archaic alphabets"
"old italic alphabets", "etruscan alphabets", "roman alphabets"
"(archaic) cretan alphabet"
Ca să vedeți cum au apărut asemenea semne în Europa,
"origin of the alphabet"
Până nu vizionați (și bine ar fi să rețineți în mare forma acelor litere, este simplu,cam seamănă cu ale noastre ) este greu și chiar imposibil să discutăm despre oricare semn.
Dacă nu vizionați "anatolian alphabets", nu putem discuta nimic despre tăblița dreptunghiulară, cu gaură, pe care sânt niște semne, ideograme (printre care un semn,ideogramă este pt. MirceaVodă probabil un cap de măgar)

Pentru a vă face o imagine de cum arată și ce fel de semne folosește /orice, oricare/ scriere care vă vine în gând din lume,
accesați www.proel.org secțiunea ALPHABETOS DE AYER Y DE HOY

www.proel.org ALPHABETOS DE AYER Y DE HOY
http://www.proel.org...tos/dibujo1.gif

Edited by eugenrau, 14 February 2011 - 21:12.

mirceavoda, on 14th February 2011, 20:48, said:

Eu zic ca daca nu le descifrezi matale, apai nedescifrate raman.

Edited by ego_zenovius, 14 February 2011 - 21:17.

Semnul sumerian SE recoltaț altfel prezent și în alte locuri reprezentând "sămânță,barley(?orz),recoltă".Apare în cele mai vechi tăblițe sumeriene unde se ținea socoteala cerealelor.
Acest semn ar putea fi prezent în tăblița drept. cu capra,este vorba de acel motiv vegetal, dar și în cea rotundă sub forma +++++ .
Puteti vedea apoi o tabliță sumeriană cu evidența unor cereale, vezi semnul rămurică
Altă tăbliță,tot cu semnul vegetalpt. cereale,recoltă
---------------------------------------------------------------
Semnele, ideograma situată în dreapta, din sfertul dreapta-jos al tăbliței rotunde,
și semnul sumerian al zeului soare samas,
apoi semnul zeiței astarte,TANIT
------------------------------
Legătura linear A,B cu scrierea Vinca
--------------
Transmiterea scrierii și alfabetelor din orientul Apropiat în aria Egeeană și Europa
-----------------------
Alfabetele arhaice grecești
-----------------------------
Originea alfabetului http://webcache.goog...r...hl=ro&gl=ro
.F. Bruce, “The Origin of the Alphabet,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 80(1948): 1-11.The Origin of the AlphabetF. F. Bruce, Esq., M.A.[p.1]In order to proceed from the known to the unknown-or at any rate from the well known to theless well known―let us take as our starting point the English alphabet as we know it to-day:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z.1 (The lower case letters are, ofcourse, simply modifications of the capitals.) This English alphabet of 26 letters is derivedfrom the Latin alphabet of 23 letters. I and J are by origin. variants of one and the sameRoman letter; the same is true of U and V; while W is exactly what we call it, a double U.Y and Z were appended to the Roman alphabet in the lst century B.C. for the more accuratetransliteration of Greek words in Latin, Y representing the modified ü sound of Greek upsilon,and Z the double dz or zd sound of Greek zeta, neither of these sounds being found in nativeLatin words. The Roman alphabet was derived through the Etruscans from a West Greekalphabet, such as was used in the early Greek colonies of southern Italy. It is due to Etruscaninfluence that the Roman letter C had not the “voiced” quality of its Greek counterpartgamma; Etruscan had no such “voiced” stop, and therefore in the alphabet which the Romansacquired through Etruscan intermediation the letters C, K, Q had all the same “unvoiced”quality. Later, when the Romans wished to distinguish the “voiced” guttural stop from the“unvoiced,” they employed G, a variant form of C, for this purpose, and inserted it in thealphabet in the place formerly occupied by Greek zeta, which the Romans jettisoned in thoseearly days because it represented no Latin sound. Five other letters of the West Greekalphabet were similarly jettisoned.[p.2]There were numerous varieties of alphabets in use in the Greek world. One was the WestGreek alphabet from which the Roman alphabet was derived; another was the East Greek orIonic alphabet, which was officially introduced at Athens in 403 B.C., and not long afterwardsreplaced the local varieties in other parts of Greece. This is the alphabet of 24 letters whichwe commonly know as the Greek alphabet. One of the main differences between it and theWest Greek form is that in the latter, H represents the aspirate sound, while in the former(since most of the Ionic Greeks dropped all their aitches) there was no need of a letter toindicate the aspirate, and so H (eta) was used to represent a long open e, like e in Frenchpère.2 In this, as in some other respects, however (e.g., in its retention of the letters F and Q),the West Greek alphabet, and hence the Roman alphabet, kept nearer to the original Greekalphabet than did the Ionic alphabet. The earliest inscriptions in the Greek alphabet occur inthe islands of Thera, Melos and Crete ; they cannot be dated with exactitude, but belong to the8th or 9th century B.C.Greek tradition derives the alphabet from the Phœnicians. Cadmus, the founder of Thebes,and legendary inventor of the alphabet, was the son of Agenor, king of Phoenicia. Not only1 The article “Alphabet” in the Encyclopcedia Britannica, 14th ed., Vol. 1 (1929), pp. 677 ff., should beconsulted; it was written by a Member of the Victoria Institute, Dr. B. F. C. Atkinson.2 By the end of the B.C. era the sound of this letter had become that of ee in English see―the sound which itretains in Modern Greek.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 2
F.F. Bruce, “The Origin of the Alphabet,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 80(1948): 1-11.does he bear a Phœnician name (from qadmu, possibly meaning “first”), but several featuresof his legend have marked Phœnician affinities, and the legend itself reflects an historicalsituation several generations before the Trojan War.3 It is quite likely, however, that thelegend confuses the introduction of a syllabic form of writing on the Greek mainland beforethe Trojan War and the introduction of the Phœnician alphabet to the Greek world severalgenerations after the Trojan War.4In any case, the Phœnician derivation of the Greek alphabet is a matter of plain fact. The earlyGreek alphabet is the Phœnician alphabet, with some adaptations to the necessities of theGreek language which, being an Indo-European tongue,[p.3]was totally different from the Semitic tongue of the Phœnicians. The most important of theseadaptations was the use of five Phœnician letters (representing three Phœnician gutturals andtwo semi-vowels) to indicate vowels.5 All 22 letters of the Phœnician alphabet representedconsonants. One of the letters used by the Greeks as a vowel, Phœnician waw, used as Greeküpsilon, was also required by the Greeks as a semi-vowel with the sound w (its original valuein Phœnician), and so it was used, in two variant forms, twice over in the Greekalphabet―once in its Phœnician position (No. 6), in its old semi-vocalic character,6 and againat the end of the alphabet (No. 23) in. its new character as a vowel-letter. (The letters whichfollow upsilon in the Greek alphabet were added subsequently and do not concern us here.)The names of most of the Greek letters are simply the Phœnician names taken over into Greekalong with the letters. Alpha, beta, gamma, delta are meaningless in Greek, except as theyserve to denote letters of the alphabet; but their original Phœnician forms, aleph, beth, gimel,daleth and so on (practically identical with the Hebrew names of the letters) are not only thenames of letters but have a meaning of their own.The Phœnician alphabet was written from right to left, as four of its derivatives, the Hebrew,Samaritan, Syriac and Arabic alphabets, are written to the present day. The earliest Greekwriting also ran from right to left. When Herodotus (Hist. v, 59) says that he saw “Cadmeiancharacters” engraved on tripods in a temple in the Boeotian Thebes, he may be referring toright-to-left writing. The next stage in Greek writing was the writing of alternate lines right toleft and left to right; this practice was known as writing boustrophedon (“ox-turning-wise”),as it resembled the alternate directions followed in ploughing, up one furrow and down thenext. Then came the third stage, in which the left-to-right direction was standardized, and thishas remained the direction in which the Greek alphabet and its derivative, the Romanalphabet, are written to this day. This matter of the direction of writing has no suchmetaphysical significance as3 See J. L. Myres, Who were the Greeks? (1930), pp. 321 f., 347 ff.4 If the Cadmus-legend reflects the historical situation of c. 1400 B.C., it was chronologically just possible forthe Phœnician alphabet to be imported into Greece at that time. But there is no evidence of its presence in theGreek world for five or six centuries after that date. Traces of writing of the period 1400-1200 B.C., found whenthe site of the Cadmeia (the citadel of Thebes) was excavated in 1907, were of non-Semitic origin.5 The three gutturals were aleph, he and ‘ayin (used by the Greeks as alpha, epsilon and omicron respectively);the two semi-vowels were waw and yod (used as üpsilon and iota).6 The letter digamma, pronounced w, which occupied the sixth place in the West Greek and other local Greekalphabets, but was lacking in the Ionic alphabet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 3
F.F. Bruce, “The Origin of the Alphabet,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 80(1948): 1-11.[p.4]some people like to read into it; it is a matter of pure convention.7How old is the Phœnician alphabet? The sarcophagus of Ahiram, king of Gebal (Byblos) inPhoenicia, discovered by Pierre Montet in 1922, has an inscription of some length in thisalphabet which is usually dated in the 13th century B.C.8 But there is earlier evidence thanthis. A vessel found in the same town of Gebal, belonging to the time o£ Amenemhet IV ofEgypt (early 18th century B.C.), has marked on it two signs which are pretty certainly thePhœnician letters, ‘ayin and kaph.9 And a date round about this time is probable on variousgrounds for the origin of the Phœnician alphabet.The origin of writing, of course, long antedates the origin of the alphabet. Simple andconvenient as alphabetic writing appears to us, it was reached at a late stage in thedevelopment of writing. This was inevitable, in view of the fact that writing developed out ofdrawing. A picture, say, of an old man, so long as it represents an old man and nothing else,remains a picture (or pictogram) only. Some of our traffic signs are of this character―thosefor cross-roads and various other types of road junction, for example. But when the picture ofan old man is intended to convey the general idea of old age, we have moved a step―and along step―in the direction of writing; the pictogram has become an ideogram. Thus, in oursystem of traffic signs, a torch does not denote a literal torch but the torch of learning. whichby a further extension of meaning is (in this particular[p.5]context) intended to indicate the presence of a school. Again, the picture of a bear, so long asit denotes that animal only―whether the species or an individual―remains a pictogram. Butlet the use of the picture be extended to cover other words which happen to have the samesound-the verb “bear” and the adjective “bare”―and another very important step forward hasbeen taken; the pictogram has become a phonogram, a sign indicating a sound, or rather, inthis case, a group of sounds, forming one syllable. And this phonogram may further be usedto denote the same syllable when it forms part of a longer word, as if, for example (in charadefashion), we expressed the word “forbear” by writing a sign for the numeral “four” (4, IV orIIII)10 followed by the picture of a bear. The representation of every syllable by a distinct sign7 The cuneiform writing was originally in columns read downward, and from right to left; but after c. 2500 B.C.it regularly runs from left to right. The Egyptian hieroglyphs were usually written from right to left (as thederived hieratic and demotic scripts always were), but sometimes from left to right, and sometimes in verticalcolumns. The Sinaitic alphabetic script was written indifferently in any of the three directions. The Indian nágariscript, probably derived from the Semitic alphabet, is written from left to right. The oldest extant piece of Latinwriting (the inscription MANIOS MED FHEFHAKED NVMASIOI on the Prænestine fibula of c. 600 B.C.)runs from right to left. The earliest extant Latin inscription in stone (not later than 400 B.C.) has its letterswritten in vertical columns, from bottom to top and from top to bottom alternately. For right-handed writers theleft-to-right direction has the advantage that one is less likely to smear or deface the words already written.8 The Ahiram inscription runs as follows in translation: “Etbbaal, son of Ahiram, king of Gebal, made this coffinfor Ahiram his father as an everlasting abode. And if any king among kings or governor among governorsbesiege Gebal and uncover this coffin, may the sceptre of his authority be broken and the throne of his kingdomoverthrown, but let peace rule over Gebal. If any man efface this inscription, may his seed perish.”9 C. F. A. Schaeffer, The Cuneiform Texts of Ras Shamra-Ugarit (1939), p. 36.10 The numeral-signs are modern ideograms. The sign 4, for example, has exactly the same meaning for a readerspeaking English, French, German or any other language, though they pronounce it quite differently from eachother four―quatre, vier and so on.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 4
F.F. Bruce, “The Origin of the Alphabet,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 80(1948): 1-11.is a great advance on the primitive stage when ideograms or logograms were the only writtensymbols. The number of possible syllables in any language, though large; is limited; with asyllabary (a set of syllabic signs), therefore, we are on the way to a more convenient system ofwriting. The number of signs in a syllabary can be further reduced if, instead of having a signfor every syllable of the consonant-vowel-consonant type (e.g., cat, dog), we use only signswhich represent either the consonant-vowel or the vowel-consonant type of syllable (ba, ab),and so instead of using signs which represent cat, dog, use signs which represent ca-at, do-og.In point of fact, it was seldom that one of these improvements was adopted to the completeexclusion of the earlier stages. Thus, in the cuneiform writing of the Euphrates-Tigris valleyand adjacent lands we find intermingled the simpler syllabic writing, the more complicatedsyllabic writing, and the still more primitive ideograms. There were several independentsyllabaries in use in the Middle East in the second millennium B.C. There was the cuneiformscript already mentioned, first used for writing Sumerian.11 and later for Elamite andAkkadian and many other languages of[p.6]Western Asia; there was the hieroglyphic script of Egypt; there were other hieroglyphicscripts in Syria and Anatolia, including that in which one dialect of Indo-European Hittite waswritten and that printed12 on the Phaistos disc (which, though found in Crete, must have beencarried there from Asia Minor); there was the linear script of Minoan Crete, which wascarried thence to the Greek mainland and to Cyprus.13While these syllabaries were in official use in the great Empires of the second millennium, thefirst experiments were being made in alphabetic writing. The Egyptians, as early as 3000B.C., developed out of their hieroglyphic writing a sort of alphabet of 24 signs, representingall the consonants current in their language; this alphabet, however, never becameindependent of the cumbersome hieroglyphic system, but served only to supplement it. Thebold step of detaching the alphabetic system completely from its unwieldy parent was takenby a people in close contact with the Egyptians. The Egyptian origin of the Phœnicianalphabet has been generally accepted for quite a long time, but the absence of any connectinglink between the Egyptian and Phœnician alphabets led from time to time to the propoundingof other theories to account for the Phœnician alphabet; Sir Arthur Evans, for example,thought that the Phœnicians were to some extent at least indebted to the Cretan linear script,and he envisaged the Philistines as the intermediaries. But we now know that the Phœnicianshad their alphabet before the advent of the Philistines in those parts.11 About 3000 B.C. we find two distinct forms of writing in Mesopotamia―the semi-pictographic script of Elamand Jemdet Nasr (near Kish), and the proto-cuneiform of Ur and Lagasb. Possibly both were derived from acommon pictographic source, but the Sumerians made a more rapid advance from it than did the Elamites.12 Yes, printed with movable stamps; not written! Sir A. Evans suggested that the inscription was a religiouschaunt in bonour of the Anatolian Great Mother of the Gods. It shows 45 different signs. See Evans, ScriptsMinoa i (1909), pp. 22 ff., 273 ff. 13 The Cretan linear script, which also goes back to a pictographic stage, remains undeciphered. However, theclue to its decipherment may now be within reach. In 1939 C. W. Blegen found about 600 tablets, written in avariation of Cretan linear script, on the site of Nestor’s city of Pylos in S.W. Greece. The script seems to havebeen used for various languages, including Mycenean Greek. When the tablets have been published and studied,it should not take long to decipher them. The Cretan linear script was also taken over by the pre-Greekpopulation of Cyprus, and then adapted to Greek by the Achaean colonists in that island. As used for writing theCyprian dialect of Greek, it was reduced to a syllabary of 54 characters, indicating open syllables only.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 5
F.F. Bruce, “The Origin of the Alphabet,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 80(1948): 1-11.The missing link between the two alphabets made its appearance when it was discovered thatrough inscriptions in the Sinai peninsula, the work of miners employed in the turquoise minesair Serabit el-Khadem, were written in an alphabet based (at any[p.7]rate to a large extent) on Egyptian hieroglyphics, but nevertheless a real, self-sufficientalphabet.14 This Sinaitic alphabet now appears to supply the connecting link between theEgyptian writing and the classic Phœnician alphabet. Dr. Alan Gardiner, who played aprominent part in identifying the script of these Serabit graftti,15 assigns it to the period of theTwelfth Dynasty of Egypt (c. 1989-1776 B.C.), when these turquoise mines were beingworked.It is noteworthy that the alphabet originated as the writing of common men, in contrast to theolder systems which were the prerogative of priests and clerks. The alphabet made it possiblefor all classes to be literate; its invention is therefore a landmark of great importance in thehistory of civilization.The excavations at Tell ed-Duweir (the Lachish of Old Testament times), begun in 1933,provided further examples of early alphabetic writing (including a line of writing on what isknown as the “Lachish Ewer” belonging to the early 13th century B.C., and four characters ona dagger of the Hyksos period), which provide links between the primitive Sinaitic script andthe developed Phœnician alphabet. Other links have been found on ostraca at Beth-shemeshand Gezer.16The principle on which the alphabetic system was developed out of the hieroglyphic isgenerally agreed to have been the acrophonic (or initial-sound) principle. To denote the soundb, for example, an ideogram was chosen which represented a word beginning with thatsound―the ideogram for both, meaning “house,” which in its earliest form shows the outlineof a house. Similarly, to denote the sound y, the ideogram for yod, meaning “hand,” waschosen, and here too, in the earliest form of the letter, the outline of a handwith outspreadfingers is clear. The close relationship of the Sinaitic symbols with the Phœnician alphabetbecame plain when it was realized that the names of the Phcerdeian letters designate theobjects depicted by the Sinaitic symbols. The Egyptian alphabet was also based on the[p.8]acrophonic principle, and it was from the Egyptians that the inventors of the Sinaitic alphabetadopted the principle. Many of the pictographs used are common to the Egyptian and Sinaiticalphabets, but in the former they designate the initial sound of the Egyptian word, while in thelatter they designate the initial sound of the Semitic word. Thus the pictograph of a house iscommon to both alphabets, but in the Egyptian one it represents h (the initial of an Egyptian14 The inscriptions were first discovered by Flinders Petrie in 1905. They are now in the Cairo Museum.15 See his articles in Journal of Egyptian Archæology ii (1915), pp. 61 ff.; Pal. Expl..Fund. Quarterly Statement(1929), pp. 48 ff.16 An article by J. W. Flight, “The Present State of Studies in the History of Writing in the Near East,” in TheHaverford Symposium on Archæology and the Bible, ed. E. Grant (New Haven, 1938), gives a convenientsummary of the data, with bibliography. See also C. C. McCown, The Ladder of Progress in Palestine (1943),eh. 8, “The Quest for an Alphabet|” (pp. 100-111).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 6
F.F. Bruce, “The Origin of the Alphabet,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 80(1948): 1-11.word meaning “house”), whereas in the Sinaitic and Phœnician alphabets it represents b, theinitial of beth.The chief reason for the absence of vowel-letters from the Semitic alphabets is their absencefrom the Egyptian alphabet from which these were developed. The Semitic languages in theirwritten form managed to get on quite well without vowel-letters. Though in some of them at alater date some letters were employed in a secondary role to denote important vowels (e.g., inHebrew, aleph, he, waw and yod, the so-called matres lectionis) and still later vowel-pointswere added to the written text, these are helpful adjuncts for the novice, but by no meansindispensable for the experienced reader. I am told by expert Hebraists that in reading Hebrewquickly they find the points a positive hindrance; it is such a nuisance to have to stop anddecipher them.It is far otherwise with Indo-European languages. Vowels play so distinctive a part in theirroots and inflections that they must be represented in the written language. And so, as wehave seen, when. the Phœnician alphabet was taken over by the Greeks, certain letters, five innumber, were utilized as vowel-signs. Why five? There were seven distinct simple vowelsounds (quite apart from differences of quantity) in classical Greekthose represented in theIonic alphabet by a, ε, η, t, o, υ and ω. “Whoever adapted the Semitic alphabet to vocalic aswell as consonantal notation,” it has been remarked, “chose precisely the five vowels used inthe Cypriote syllabary, in spite of the fact that a Greek ear heard at least seven vowels in thelanguage.”17 This suggests the possibility that the pre-Greek system of writing whichoriginated in Crete and spread from there north and east may at some stage have influencedthe adaptation of the Phœnician alphabet to Greek usage.[p.9]There was one early form of the Semitic alphabet which did to a limited extent express voweldistinctions. This was the cuneiform alphabet of Ras Shamra, which was in use in the 15thcentury B.C. This cuneiform alphabet is not a development from Babylonian cuneiform; it isthe result of trying to write the early Phœnician alphabet with a metal stylos on clay tablets.And the Ras Shamra alphabet is so well advanced that the alphabet from which it developedmust be substantially older.18 This agrees with the evidence we have already noticed fordating the origin of the Semitic alphabet in the Twelfth Egyptian Dynasty. The Ras Shamraalphabet, however, instead of having but one sign for the letter aleph, has three, according asaleph is followed by a, i or u. Professor O. Eissfeldt19 connects this fact with the tradition inSanchuniathon that Eisinos, the brother of Khna (the eponym of Canaan), was “the inventorof ‘the three letters’.” Eissfeldt suggests that Eisirios represents ultimately a corruption ofSemitic Ugar, the eponym of Ugarit, the ancient Canaanite city whose site is now known asRas Shamra. Sanchuniathon ascribes the invention of letters in general (as distinct from thesespecial three) to Taautos, who is obviously the Egyptian Thoth; it is interesting that thePhœnician mythologist and historian should thus preserve a tradition of the Egyptian origin ofthe alphabet which modern discovery has shown to be securely based.17 Quoted by Sir G. Hill, History of Cyprus, i (1940), p. 53, with a reference to Rhys Carpenter in AmericanJournal of Archæology, xlii (1938), p. 67.18 C. F. A. Schaeffer, The Cuneiform Texts of Ras Shamra-Ugarit (1939), p. 36.19 Ras Schamra and Sanchuniathon (1939), p. 60.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 7
F.F. Bruce, “The Origin of the Alphabet,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 80(1948): 1-11.What is the relevance of all this for Biblical studies? The alphabet, as we have seen, broughtwriting and reading within the reach of ordinary people. In Judges viii, 14, we are told howGideon laid hands on a youth of Succoth in Transjordan, who, according to the text of theAuthorized and Revised Versions, “described” to him the chief men of the city. But themargins of both Versions honestly point out that the word means “wrote” (Heb. kathab). Butthat a chance young man should have been able to write seemed too unlikely, down to thedays when the oldest alphabetic autograph known was Mesha’s Moabite stone (inscribed c.850 B.C. and discovered in A.D. 1868). Now, however, it seems perfectly probable that weare to understand the narrative literally, and that the youth wrote down for Gideon a list of thechief men of his city.The Hellenistic Jewish writer Eupolemos, in the 2nd century[p.10]B.C., put forward the view that writing was invented by Moses. This view was repeatedly putforward by Jews and Christians down to the 19th century; but now we know that men werewriting at least 2,000 years before the time of Moses. In our own day, however, the belief hasbeen revived in another form; if Moses did not invent writing, may he not at least have beenthe inventor of alphabetic writing? Sir Charles Marston, in The Bible Comes Alive (1937), p.180, used italics to give emphasis to his conclusion that “the Bible began to be written when,and where, alphabetical writing began to be written.” And he went on to suggest that “ theremay be an even closer relationship than has yet been brought to light.” If the “closerrelationship” in his mind bad anything to do with the idea that Moses invented the alphabet, itis disposed of by the evidence which puts the origin of the alphabet back to the days ofDynasty XII.20But we do know that Moses may perfectly well have written in Hebrew in an earlyalphabetical script. There is no necessity now, as there seemed to be 35 years ago whenProfessor Naville wrote his Archæology and the Old Testament, to believe that Moses musthave used the cuneiform script on clay tablets like those of the Tell el-Amarna collection. Ofcourse he could have done so, but it is now seen to be equally possible―and perhaps moreprobable―that he used the alphabet. (I do not touch the question of how his documentarysources were written.) The history of the Bible, at any rate, is closely bound up, right from thestart, with the history of the alphabet. And believers in the providence of God may wellconclude that it was by that providence that, when “God’s Word written” was about to makeits first appearance, a form of writing lay ready to hand for the purpose, the understanding ofwhich was not restricted to specially trained scholars, but lay within the capacity ofEveryman.WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONSBrig.-Gen. H. BIDDULPH wrote : Col. C. R. Conder, in The First Bible (Blackwood, 1902; esp.chap. 4), produces strong evidence,20 Some light relief in the progress of research was provided by H. Grimme’s attempt to read the names Moses,Hatshepsut, Yabu, Sinai, in the Sinaitic inscriptions―partly through interpreting as significant letters merecracks and weather-marks in the stone (Althebräische Inschriften von Sinai [1923], Die Lösung desSinaischriftproblems [1926]).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 8
F.F. Bruce, “The Origin of the Alphabet,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 80(1948): 1-11.[p.11]based upon variants in personal names, that the Pentateuch was written originally incuneiform characters. Conder is not an authority who can lightly be set aside.AUTHOR’S REPLYI am indebted to Brig.-Gen. Biddulph for raising the point about Conder. I am aware thatConder, like Naville after him, argued that the Pentateuch was written in cuneiform characterson clay tablets, and therefore presumably in the Akkadian language. The early date ofalphabetic writing was unknown to them. Now that we know that its invention ante-dated thetime of Moses, it is no longer necessary to think of him as writing in Akkadian cuneiform.This was used by the Egyptian foreign office in the Eighteenth Dynasty for diplomaticcorrespondence with subjects and allies in Western Asia, but it does not follow that Moseswould use it, especially as his reading public would not understand it. We may take it that thePentateuch (as such) never existed in any earlier form than alphabetically written Hebrew.The variants in personal names (especially divine names) have a much simpler explanation. Since my paper was communicated to the Institute, Professor W. F. Albright has made afurther study of the Sinai alphabetic inscriptions. According to the New York Times ofJanuary 22nd, 1948, and the Biblical Archæologist for February, 1948, Albright finds thatthey are written in an alphabet of 28 consonantal characters, and he dates them, on the basis ofpottery found near the mines, about 1500 B.C. See also B. A. S. O. R., April, 1948, whereProf. Albright gives his own account. It seems most likely now that the Sinaitic andPhœnician alphabets go back to a common alphabetic ancestor, which originated about 2000B.C. or shortly after, probably at Gebal, which was in close contact with Egypt.To my bibliographical notes two very important additions may now be made : D. Diringer,The Alphabet: A Key to the History of Mankind (Hutchinson, 1948), and G. R. Driver, SemiticWriting From Pictograph to Alphabet (Cumberlege, 1948). The latter work contains theBritish Academy Schweich Lectures for 1944.© 1948 The Victoria Institute. Reproduced by permission.Prepared for the Web in March 2007 by Robert I. Bradshaw.http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/

ego_zenovius, on 14th February 2011, 21:16, said:

În principiu,când este vorba de citirea sau descifrarea unui material necunoscut, unde necunoscutele ar putea fi,
-limba
-scrisul
-și încă eventual altele,perioada...
NU EXISTĂ NICI O METODĂ
Pe Champollion nu l-a învățat nimeni și nu a aplicat o metodă anume.După el au venit alții, pentru că el nu a reușit să deslușească în mod complet și definitiv scrierea egipteană. Exact același lucru a fost valabil pt. Hrozny care a descoperit o limbă nouă,hitita dar a și reușit să facă o serie de prime citiri de început. Alții după el au făcut munca de jos și au completat restul de 90 la sută, pentru a putea fi citită oricare tăbliță. Nici M.Ventrix nu a avut vre-o metodă anume, însă a procedat extrem de ordonat și rațional, a făcut tot felul de grile. Nu știu care era rezultatul final, dacă nu ar fi dus o coresp. asiduă cu un altul pe măsură,Chadwick.Nici în ziua de azi nu este lămurită mulțumitor citirea scrierii linear B,respectiv lexic și altele.
În toate aceste cazuri, a fost omul, singur, neajutorat și părăsit, în față cu neantul, respectiv infinitatea de posibiități de interpretatre sau citire. Acești au fost vârfuri ale capacității umane, pe care cei de rând,furnicile de rând nu aveau cum și cu ce să-iajute. Au petrecut zeci de mii de ore în singurătatea propriilor gânduri și întrebări.
Așa cum fiecare bolnav este particular și necesită o îngrijire personalizată și acele scrieri au necesitat o muncă în care nu mai contează nici o teorie sau explicație ci contează un singur lucru,rezultatul,descifrarea.
Au fost capacități și vârfuri ale ființei umane din care nu se nasc în lume 10 la minut.

Pentru citirea unui text unde limba sau scrisul sânt necunoscute, ori amândouă nu există o metodă infailibilă.
Există doar niște ăndrumări și reguli generale pe cât posibila fi respectate, cuplate cu unele observații, toate aceste fiind făcute de oameni cu experiență în acest domeniu.
Dar până la urmă fiecare are metoda sausetullui de metode, pentrucă este particularizat pe individul concret care face asta acesta avânt calități și abilitățimai mari în unele direcții decât altele.
Dau aici un scurt extras de ce metode a folosit Michael Ventris la descifrarea limbii minoane și scrisului linear B

Man Who Deciphered Linear B http://www.world-arc...rticle/17-.html

He had two main methods of working, both with precedents from his architectural training. The first was the concept of 'group working'. With extraordinary generosity he established a system of 'Work Notes', which he sent out to his colleagues and possible rivals round the world.

The other technical device was that of a grid. It had long been clear that Linear B was a syllabary- that is each sign represented a combined consonant and vowel. How did they fit together? He devised a grid with five vowels across the top, V1 - 5 and fifteen consonants down the side, C1-15 . His grids were drawn up with architectural precision, and lettered with his superb lettering ability. He worked solidly, producing Work Notes at the rate of about one a month. Then suddenly, in March 1953, when he was about to produce Work Note 20, the breakthrough was made. Some of the signs appeared to be the names of places.

How about trying to see if they fitted the names of the Cretan towns in the classical period? He tried out Amnisos, the port of Knossos. This fixed several positions on the grid: he applied these to another group, and the word Knossos emerged. In a rush, more Cretan towns emerged - Tu-li-so (Tulissos), Pa-i-to (Phaestos), and Lu-ki-to, Luktos. On June 1st, he sat down to type what would turn out to be his final work note, number 20, and boldly titled it 'Are the Knossos and Pylos tablets written in Greek?'. He called this merely a frivolous digression, but rapidly more and more words began to fit in. Carpenters, wainwrights, chairmakers and bakers made their appearance, as did Father (pa-te) and the people (da-mo).

SIMBOLUL DENUMIT "GARD" , REPREZENTÂND GARD
        CONFORM  STUDIILOR APROFUNDATE ALE CERCETĂTORULUI ROMÂNO-GERMAN MIRCEA-VODĂ ALIAS...

Din The Archaic Cretan Greek Alphabet http://www.carolandr...haic_alpha.html
4.??t  whose sound was /?/ (voiceless pharyngeal fricative). Speakers of western Greek and other dialects, which retained the ancient Greek /h/, used this letter for their /h/, calling it "h?ta". But those dialects, such as most of the Ionian dialects and Cretan Doric, that "dropped their aitches" simply called it "?ta"and used it from the start to denote the long low-mid vowel /??/. This was always the usage in the archaic Cretan alphabets.

eugenrau Denumiri uzuale folosite :
                 "Het',   "Heta",   "Eta",   "greek epigraphical Eta",    "open Heta",    "ete-heta with 3 bars"

Edited by eugenrau, 15 February 2011 - 14:16.

Am făcut un blog cu mai multe pagini despre scrierea Danubiană și tăblițele de la Tărtăria. Acolo explic în detaliu foarte multe lucruri.

Edited by lucifer76, 19 February 2011 - 15:31.
fara bloguri externe

Osă vă prezint dintr-una din lucrările publicate de Domnul Kostas Theodorides  (una fiind chiar intitulată The Greek Archaic Alphabet
Alphabetica II
The Vowel Harmonic in the Greek Archaic Alphabet http://www.anistor.g...enback/p052.htm ) din revista ANISTORITON, un tabel comparativ al diferitelor scrisuri, aici fiind vorba doar de vocale.
Notă.
Se pare că accepția dată semnelor Vinca se pare că nu-i aparține autorului sus-menționat (ultimul rând de sus) și are cred doar un caracter de exemplu.
Dacă ar fi dupăacest tabel, semnul acela de pe tăblița rotundă de la Tărtăria ar fi E. Dar semnul doar arată asemănător, și în realitate nu este așa, cineva l-a simplificat.
Tot nu ar fi chiar rău să fie E, dar nu este; semnul după mine este eventual EGO/EUO. (un E sus,apoi în jos un V, și în final un semn C)
[ http://www.anistor.gr/english/enback/vharm_2.jpg - Pentru incarcare in pagina (embed) Click aici ]

Edited by eugenrau, 21 February 2011 - 01:56.

eugenrau, on 15 februarie 2011 - 04:17, said:

Cîţi oameni cu experienţă în acest domeniu cunoşti tu? care sint acei oameni cu experienţă în domeniul descifrării de texte?
Nu merge să spui că fiecare are "metoda lui sau setul lui de metode". Pt acele texte nu poţi folosi diferite metode. E una singură bună. Cîte metode ai văzut tu că s-au folosit la descifrarea textului de pe Inelul de la Ezerovo? Eu am văzut una singură. Au folosit-o toţi înaintea mea. E metoda comparativă. E greşită. Ea constă în a izola pe text grupuri de litere care par a forma cuvinte. Aşa de ex ei au izolat ROLIS şi au zis că e bine aşa pt că a existat un Rolis, conducător trac.
Arată asta practic dacă zici că ai priceput metoda lui Ventris. Iei un text dacic şi îl separi in cuvinte.

eugenrau, on 21 februarie 2011 - 01:49, said:

Pe tăbliţele de la Tărtăria nu e scrie re alfabetică ci sînt pictograme, deci nu e vreun E pe acolo!

eugenrau, on 19 februarie 2011 - 15:09, said:

Păi, tu eşti în măsură să explici chestii din astea?

eugenrau, on 20 februarie 2011 - 20:57, said:

mai sînt semnele: poartă, laţ, arc. capcanele reprezentate acolo sînt de tipul capcană cu laţ.
pe tăbliţele de la Tărtăria sînt reprezentate lucruri din viaţa vînătorilor preistorici de capre. Animalele erau vînate cu capcane cu laţ. Se făceau garduri ca să dirijeze animalele spre capcane. Cînd animalul călca în laţ acesta era strîns prin declanşarea unui arc ce menţinea laţul strîns pe picior.
Asta e pe tăbliţele de la Tărtăria, adică nu e nici o formă de scriere.
Mircea Vodă, actual ionel mironescu.

Edited by ionelmironescu, 20 May 2018 - 09:54.

Concluzii după cercetarea amănunțită a tăblițelor de la Tărtăria  cca 12 ani:
(Rețineți că în acest timp am luat cunoștință cu începutul scrierii în lume și am asimilat foarte multe din semnele folosite.Printre altele inclusiv semnele folosite în faza care a precedat scrierea și anume proto-scrierea.Semnele respective se numesc semne proto-cuneiforme.)
Concluziile conduc la o perspectiva sumbră, și anume că ceva este în mare neregulă cu tăblițele.
Tăblițele au un autor, cineva le-a inscripționat și astfel au o origine și din această perspectivă desigur sunt originale.
Tăblițele conțin o aglomerare, îngrămădire (să nu supăr pe cineva,"ghiveci") de semne folosite pe parcursul a mii de ani și pe o arie extrem de întinsă.
Nu am idee cine și exact când le-a adunat, se pare că cu cât ne apropiem de prezent șansele sunt mai mari.
Scopul este neclar, dar reiese din analiză că autorul a vrut să epateze, să arate cuiva cunoștințele lui vaste în ceea ce privește evoluția scrisului. Deci cumva ar putea avea scop și caracter didactic.
Pentru ca se porneste de la semne pictografice (pe cea dreptunghiulara cu pictogramele ied și motiv vegetal) până chiar spre litere (cea rotunda împărțită în patru cu o cruce)
Nici-un scrib onest și cu intenție evidentă de a transmite ceva, respectiv un mesaj nu a folosit nicăieri în lume simultan mai multe sisteme de scriere ( ex: pictograme+ silabograme sau litere).
Nu există nici-un moment în timp și istorie în care să fie folosite toate acele semne prezente pe tăblițe.
Ba mai mult, o serie de semne sunt cert proto-cuneiforme iar altele se regăsesc ca silabograme Egeene.Ori toate aceste ultime semne au fost descoperite aproape de zilele noastre.Cele sumeriene proto-cuneiforme de Wolley în 1935 și cele Linear A și B de Sir Arthur Evans tot cam așa.

Edited by eugenrau, 28 September 2022 - 01:10.

toate aceste ultime semne au fost descoperite aproape de zilele noastre.Cele sumeriene proto-cuneiforme de Wolley în 1935 și cele Linear A și B de Sir Arthur Evans tot cam așa.
Somitatile în materie de proto-scriere sumeriană Adam Falkenstein și Aisec Abramovici Vaiman au afirmat că scribul pare a fi fost mai degrabă iliterat. Probabil nu au vrut să facă afirmații mai tranșante ori depreciative privind autenticitatea, ca să nu atingă orgoliul nostru național.

Acuma bine, concluziile istorice nu ar trebui să fie înfluențate de orgoliul național.
Mai ales că nic istoricii noștri nu susțin vechimea sau interpretarea dată în diverse articole acestor tăblițe.

Pentru că da, e ceva foarte în neregulă cu ele, și numai pentru că au fost arse după ”descoperire”.
Ghilimele, pentru că nu doar că nu mai pot fi datate, și vechimea e pur speculativă, dar ar putea la fel de bine să fie fabricații. Puțin probabil, dar în situația asta sîntem.


Dar între timp lucrurile nu stau pe loc

Soarta a vrut ca tocmai profesorul Luca sa descopere, pe traseul viitoarei autostrazi Sibiu – Orastie, în situl arheologic Miercurea Sibiului 2, la doar 40 de kilometri distanta de Tartaria, o scriere si mai veche… “Eu sunt zguduit. Am organizat simpozioane, am publicat volume internationale cu semne si simboluri, cautând sa destructurez ideea dupa care în perioada neolitica existau sisteme de scriere. Nu stiu ce sa zic în cazul acesta, e ceva ordonat, nu e ornament. Din punct de vedere stiintific, este o descoperire deosebita. Când va aparea în lumea internationala va stârni o furtuna”, declara atunci directorul Muzeului National Brukenthal.

Obiectul respectiv este o bucata dintr-un vas ceramic inscriptionat, a fost realizat în anul 6200 î.Hr., adica are o vechime de 8.200 de ani, si a fost gasit la cinci metri sub pamânt, adâncime neobisnuita pentru sapaturile arheologice. Desi nu exista înca o cheie de citire a mesajului de pe vas, prof. Sabin Luca considera ca înlantuirea de semne ar putea fi descifrata daca vor fi puse cap la cap simbolurile asemanatoare care exista din abundenta în zona dunareana.”

Cea mai veche scriere de pe Pământ a fost descoperită la Miercurea Sibiului
https://www.dir.org....curea-sibiului/

Quote

Are omul dreptate. Nimeni nu se apuca sa sape la 4m adancime dupa relicte si nici cu tehnologie nu poti detecta la adancimea asta ceva. Este foarte clar falsul
ca si tablitele de la Tartaria.

Edited by WestPoint, 15 November 2022 - 15:15.

Ce legătură e între prima propoziție și a doua ?
Deci dacă nu te-ai gândit să-ți cauți telefonul în dulap, pentru că nu ar trebui să fie acolo, și dacă-l găsești înseamnă că e fals ?

Legatura este FALSUL. Banuiam ca nu vei face lagatura....In acelasi articol sunt ambele falsuri pomenite.

1. Cea mai veche scriere de pe Pământ a fost descoperită la Miercurea Sibiului
2. cele trei tablite descoperite la Tartaria, judetul Alba, în 1961.

Da, sînt, unul ca descoperire incertă, cealaltă confirmată.
Ce nu ți-e clar, să te ajutăm ?

Morosanul said:

Asta seamănă a SCRIERE?

În afara de prof. Luca (arheolog), a mai confirmat cineva că ar fi vorba de o scriere? ba încă botezată ”părinte” al alfabetelor europene?

Morosanul, on 15 noiembrie 2022 - 22:11, said:

La ce sa ma ajuti?

Quote

Quote

Scrierea de 8000 de ani de la Miercurea Sibiului

Scriere? Mai degraba niste simbolori sau pictograme