tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-54078404034334249402024-03-13T09:01:38.912-07:00Minoan language blogThis small website is devoted to the mysteries of the Minoan civilization, its language and anything we can decipher out of it. Feel free to share your thoughts through comments or by sending me an e-mail.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.comBlogger51125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-71711313688237313062016-06-21T15:00:00.001-07:002016-06-21T15:05:00.680-07:00Reconstructing the family tree of ancient Aegean writing systemsBefore going astray and heading straight into Cypro-Minoan matters, I would like to discuss a small but important topic. This post will be about the evolution of the Aegean writing systems: Here, we will attempt to reconstruct their intimate historic connections as accurately as possible based on a rather fragmentary set of evidence available today.
<br />
<br />
Writing appeared rather suddenly on Crete, at the beginning of the so-called "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoan_chronology">Middle Minoan period</a>" at the turn of the 2nd millenium BC. It coincided with profound changes in society and culture as well as the accelerated urbanization of the island. These changes are best exemplified by the architectural innovations (such as the ashlar masonry) leading to the construction of the so-called "Old palaces". There can be little doubt that the sudden surge in Minoan technology, arts and culture was triggered by the establishment of regular trade contacts with the advanced Middle Eastern civilizations. With Egypt being the single most influential empire of the region, it is no wonder that the earliest Minoan writing was clearly modelled after the Middle Kingdom Egyptian hieroglyphs.<br />
<br />
Although superficially indeed similar to Egyptian symbols, <b>Cretan Hieroglyphs</b> are clearly distinct in both form and phonetic value. Yet the biggest difference lies in the underlying system itself. Egyptian Hieroglyphs are part of a complex writing system, where most signs have more than one possible reading, dependent on context (similarly to the Japanese Kanji characters). Signs could have both a phonetic (single consonant or syllable) value or an ideogrammatic (word) reading, but could even be utilized as phonetic complements or logograms, "reinforcing" the reading of words they were attached to. As many of these duplicities could only be interpreted by a native speaker of Old Egyptian, this system was very difficult to utilize for speakers of foreign languages. Also, the Egyptian system had over <a href="http://ancientegyptonline.co.uk/Gardiner-sign-list.html">800 different signs</a>, which is an extremely large inventory of symbols compared to Cretan Hieroglyphs (roughly 85 or so different signs are known). Minoan scribes apparently took only the concept of writing from Egypt, creating their own signs and simplifying the system so that it became almost fully phonetic. Such a low number of individual characters is uncharacteristic of the complex writing systems of the ancient Near East, but it is fully compatible with a simple syllabary (reminiscent of the modern Japanese Hiragana or Katakana writing). Thus we can safely assume that Cretan Hieroglyphs, similarly to all later Aegean writing systems, were already syllabic in nature.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-WQoNaXtHYSc/V2m1DPelreI/AAAAAAAABBk/uBcX2nN69IEZ9owZVh7RvgAvts9EkvFjQCKgB/s1600/Aegean-writing-systems-evolution.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="263" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-WQoNaXtHYSc/V2m1DPelreI/AAAAAAAABBk/uBcX2nN69IEZ9owZVh7RvgAvts9EkvFjQCKgB/s320/Aegean-writing-systems-evolution.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><i>Fig. 01: Family tree of Aegean writing systems.</i></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
Hieroglyphic Cretan script is mostly preserved on sealstones, but was also used on short clay tablets, bars and labels for the explicit purpose of administration. Other uses were rare; the longest contiguous Hieroglyphic text is found on the altarstone of Malia (in a religious context). As seals might have been used by several generations, it is difficult to judge when the use of the Hieroglyphic script came to an end. One thing is clear: After the rebuilding of the palatial complexes on Crete (with the advent of the so-called "New Palace Period") the Hieroglyphic script fell out of regular use. A new script has taken its place, called Linear A. The relationship of Linear A and Hieroglyphics is probably comparable to the relation between Egyptian Hieroglyphic and Hieratic/Demotic script. All currently available evidence suggests that the underlying system remained essentially the same; it is the shape of signs that suffered profound change due to graphical simplification. <br />
<br />
<b>Linear A</b> was used much more extensively than Hieroglyphs. Hundreds of clay tablets, inscribed vessels, statues, altarstones and even jewelery testifies its daily use. The triumph of Linear A is also striking in a geographical sense: Wherever Cretan traders went, Linear A followed. Perhaps due to the simplicity of the syllabary, it quickly spread to other regions surrounding Crete. While regularly used on many Aegean islands, sporadic finds suggest that it also reached the Greek mainland as well as the island of Cyprus and the Syrian coast. In the Aegean region, Linear A eventually evolved into the much better known <b>Linear B</b>. Apart from a few newly introduced signs, the difference between the two linear scripts is merely stylistic; anyone skilled in reading the Linear B inscriptions can still read Linear A with relative ease. Their key difference lies not in the form, but in the language these scripts record: While Linear A inscriptions are evidence of a now-extinct bronze age language of Minoan Crete and the Aegean islands, most Linear B phrases are clearly Greek, an archaic dialect now termed as "Mycenaean Greek". Linear B was used at every important Mycenaean polity on the Greek mainland, yet the largest cache of clay tablets have been uncovered at Knossos, at the final destruction layer of the palatial complex (contrary to Evans, they more likely date to around 1200 BC, contemporary with the Pylos tablets). This is also the latest evidence of the use of Linear B: Knowledge of writing was apparently lost with the collapse of the Mycenaean civilization and the immigration of Doric tribes into southern Greece and the Aegean islands.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iyPvIuqzLiA/V2m1JLjMlhI/AAAAAAAABBs/oo_vlmmhpEMuuc0VolleMzpL-E9mCkoggCKgB/s1600/Festive-Linear-A.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="191" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iyPvIuqzLiA/V2m1JLjMlhI/AAAAAAAABBs/oo_vlmmhpEMuuc0VolleMzpL-E9mCkoggCKgB/s320/Festive-Linear-A.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><i>Fig. 02: Characteristic signs in Festive Linear A</i></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<br />
Some enigmatic findings have also been uncovered on Crete that do not fit into the above, simple model of evolution. This mainly concerns two famous artifacts with inscriptions, the Phaistos disk and the Arkalochori axe. Although their signs are perfectly picture-like, thus reminiscent of Cretan Hieroglyphs, these are NOT written in Hieroglyphic. In fact, they constitute a poorly-recorded variant of Linear A, that I will here term as "<b>Festive Linear A</b>". It is very clear from several signs these inscriptions feature (namely, the "hairy head", the "cat head", the "flying eagle" and the "dotted column" signs) that they cannot be Hieroglyphic. There are no signs that would depict a flying bird in Cretan Hieroglyphic, but there is a clear Linear A sign (with phonetic value <b>KU</b>) with this exact shape. While a cat or a cat head is occasionally seen as a decorative element on sealstones, it is never used as a phonetic sign in any Hieroglyphic inscription; At the same time, the Linear A sign representing the syllable <b>MA</b> very closely resembles a cat's head.<br />
<br />
Although it is difficult to read the earliest Cretan inscriptions, it is more-or-less clear that the linear A sign with the phonetic value I evolved from a Hieroglyphic sign depicting a hand with fingers. In Linear A, this sign is not just hand-like, it also resembles a hairy head. On both the Phaistos disc and the Arkalochori axe, the "hairy head" character very likely represents a vowel, and could essentially be identical to the Linear A "<b>I</b>" sign. Judged by these examples, it seems that Festive Linear A was a throwback to the more picture-like representations seen in Hieroglyphics. Yet by the time these inscriptions were written, Cretan Hieroglyphs were probably already extinct. The mnemonics the scribes used to learn Linear A symbols could have been changed over the centuries, and many of the Linear A characters clearly lost their original shape (see my example of the evolution of the "<b>NA</b>" sign). Therefore their "reversal" to a detailed graphical image sometimes created anachronistic depictions, and these can be quite confusing to even experts of Aegean writing systems. A good example from present time could be the mnemonics used by Japanese students to learn certain characters. The Hiragana sign<b> </b>ね representing the syllable "NE" may be compared to a cat figure (and by pure chance, it does even abbreviate the Japanese word for "cat" [neko]). Yet we know that this sign probably originated from a Chinese predecessor 禰 with honorific meanings "god" or "ancestor" (and obviously not depicting a cat, but rather a sanctuary or shrine).<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SR66a97kakw/V2m1fDayDBI/AAAAAAAABB0/mVOKSOoTDN4Dzh2oczLa0ySRXN2auwIJwCKgB/s1600/NA-sign-comparisons.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="220" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SR66a97kakw/V2m1fDayDBI/AAAAAAAABB0/mVOKSOoTDN4Dzh2oczLa0ySRXN2auwIJwCKgB/s320/NA-sign-comparisons.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><i>Fig. 03: Appearance of "NA" sign in different scripts.</i></span></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
While Linear A never managed to gain popularity in any region of the ancient Near East, it has been adopted on Cyprus from early on. Since the languages spoken on Cyprus differed from that of Crete, the script also underwent changes; giving rise to the so-called <b>Cypro-Minoan</b> syllabary (its earliest evidence stems from around 1500 BC.). It might be somewhat surprising that Cypro-Minoan actually consists of less signs than Linear A. Voiced and voiceless stop consonants were no longer distinguished (as a result many D- T- P-series signs and the entire Q-series fell out of use), but an entirely new series of signs was also introduced for syllables beginning with R-. While the main language recorded by Cypro-Minoan inscriptions is still poorly known, a few clay tablets found at Ugarit contain words of undoubtedly Western Semitic origin. This enables us to read a handful of (but not all) <a href="https://sites.google.com/site/collesseum/cyprusscripts">Cypro-Minoan signs</a> with some certainty. Unlike Linear B, the latter writing system survived the bronze age collapse, and eventually evolved into the classical <b>Cypriot script</b>. The Cypriot syllabary represents the latest stage in the millenia-long evolution of Aegean writing. Its signs lost all image-like appearance, becoming abstract lines and curves reminiscent of classical Greek letters. Nevertheless, the Cypriot script is still a syllabary, thus very different from the true Greek alphabet (that evolved from the family of Semitic writing systems). Most Cypriot inscriptions are clearly Greek, yet there are still a number of documents that were written in an extinct, local minority language called Eteocypriot. With all likelihood, it is related to the language of Cypro-Minoan inscriptions, becoming extinct only in the classical era. But that is a story for another time...Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-23229214354025882982016-03-28T11:00:00.001-07:002016-04-07T03:07:04.908-07:00The great city of Troy - Aegean archaeology and reconstruction of settlementsA warm welcome to everyone! Especially to those who still await new posts. After a long silence - lasting for several years - I finally managed to secure enough free time to continue my research into Minoan matters. This time we shall explore a brand-new question: How accurate are the restorations of Bronze-age cities - if they are based on excavations of their citadels only?<br />
<br />
A few years ago as I was travelling through Turkey, we paid a visit to numerous historical sites: from the Neolithic to the Ottoman era. Of these many, one ancient city stands out - because both of its fame and its relatedness to the civilizations across the Aegean. This is the city of <b>Troy</b>, known to Greeks as <b>Ilion</b>. Compared to the impressive hellenistic ruins found elsewhere in Asia Minor, the site of Troy does not offer much to the average tourists. Apart from the few Roman-era remains dotting the hillside, there is very little to be seen. Except for the foundations of earlier cyclopean wallings. However, the building stones seen deep on the bottom of the trench dug by Schliemann betray the lengthy history of this township.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-fZvFMq2WuGw/Vvlr-2PIl-I/AAAAAAAABAw/venm3ZvSyQUz2b6K8YotxZiLywqItGoDQ/s1600/Walls-of-Troy-VII.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-fZvFMq2WuGw/Vvlr-2PIl-I/AAAAAAAABAw/venm3ZvSyQUz2b6K8YotxZiLywqItGoDQ/s320/Walls-of-Troy-VII.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Something that surprises even people educated in ancient history is the high age of this archaeological site. The region of Troy was probably first settled in the Neolitic. Eventually it grew into a village, then a town. As early as in the 3rd millenium BC, it already had a fortified citadel with stone buildings. Schliemann's excavations unearthed some of the wealth that looters did not take. "The golden jewels of Helen" actually belonged to a noblewoman who lived in the age when the Pyramids of Gizah were built! As early as 2600 BC (<a href="http://cerhas.uc.edu/troy/troy_ii_video.html">Troy, layer II</a>), it was already a modest settlement with over 2000 inhabitants, spreading far beyond its citadel on the plains. Troy lay at the crossroads of <a href="http://cerhas.uc.edu/troy/trade1.html">ancient trade routes</a> - both overland and naval ones. This gave the city a high level of prosperity rarely seen in that period. Remember, that long-range trading already began with the Sumerians. Some of the jewellery found at the excavation of Ur (southern Iraq) had lapis lazuli insets stemming from the mountains of Badakhshan, Afghanistan. The route between these two locations is more than 3000 km (1900 miles) long, and must have taken several months for ancient trade caravans to complete - if there was ever a direct connection. Similar lapis lazuli objects were also discovered at Troy itself, implying a fairly "globalized" trade network of luxuries, even in that early era. <br />
<br />
We still have a lot to learn about this period. But it looks certain that Troy (the so-called "maritime Troia" culture) was an exception, rather that the rule. In the earliest Bronze Age, much of the western Aegean was still severely lagging behind the ancient Near East in development. The great "palace" of Knossos was built only a millenium later. The Lion Gate of Mycenae is approximately 1300 years younger, than the walls and gates of Troy II!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-098vllX8wQs/VvlsCjmQVyI/AAAAAAAABA0/nLAiuaXSlxsjkqK0wyHFtNrrG1YcM8Ogw/s1600/Troy-archaeological-site-01.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-098vllX8wQs/VvlsCjmQVyI/AAAAAAAABA0/nLAiuaXSlxsjkqK0wyHFtNrrG1YcM8Ogw/s320/Troy-archaeological-site-01.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Walking around the archaeological site, there is but one thing disturbing the mind. The excavated area is just too small for such a prosperous town, and we are not even talking about Homer's Troy. It is expected to be a local power, yet there are no more than perhaps half a dozen buildings within the walls of Troy II. Built some 600 years later, the walls of Troy VI form a somewhat bigger circle. Even so, the visible remnants of Troy VI or VII consist of less than a dozen or so buildings. Somewhat unimpressive for those having read Homer's the Iliad (of watched its modern recreation, made in Hollywood).<br />
<br />
After the era of high prosperity in the 3rd millenium BC, Troy II was destroyed by fire. But the site continued to be inhabited, even if impoverished. Layers III and IV document several centuries of history, when Troy was apparently disconnected from the major trade routes of the world. Starting from the early 2nd millenium BC (Troy IV and V), the town increasingly fell under the influence of the advanced Anatolian cultures in the east. With the coming of the Late Bronze Age, the walled citadel of Troy was rebuilt again, in a more grandiose way than ever before. Thus Troy VI - roughly contemporary with the palatial complexes of Minoan Crete - was more than a match for the neighbouring Anatolian or Mycenaean city-states. From the Hittite archives, we can deduce that the town was probably called <b>Wilusa</b>, and was possibly a capitol of a local state <b>Taruisa</b> (ancient Greek
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="font-family: "arial" , sans-serif;">Ιλιον</span></i></span> [Ilion] and<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , sans-serif;"><span lang="grc-GR"> <i>Τρωας</i></span></span> [</span>Troas], respectively). Wilusa could have been a member or an ally to the <b>"League of Assuwa"</b>, a confederacy of lesser city-states in Western Anatolia (c.f. ancient Greek <span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="font-family: "arial" , sans-serif;">Ασια</span></i> </span>[Asia], Linear B A-SWI-JA). Its very existence bothered the Hittite great kings and Mycenaean warlords alike.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Jf7ZRvJF34c/VvlsKFKIs7I/AAAAAAAABA4/paDGEBmL9jEgJG_b9cB8JwGsUUk87xqnA/s1600/Troy-archaeological-site-02.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="237" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Jf7ZRvJF34c/VvlsKFKIs7I/AAAAAAAABA4/paDGEBmL9jEgJG_b9cB8JwGsUUk87xqnA/s320/Troy-archaeological-site-02.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Where could the rest of the city been? Some fairly recent excavations have finally managed to answer this question, by unearthing the outer walls of the settlement, lying far beyond the citadel hill. Troy was a major city of its time and occupied a much larger area than just the hilltop fort. The lower city - the main settlement itself - was several times the size of the archaeological site open to tourists. It has been recently estimated that <a href="http://cerhas.uc.edu/troy/troy_vi_video.html">Troy VI</a> had roughly 10,000 residents. Troy was a great city for its age; even if it was a dwarf compared to the largest Mesopotamian or Egyptian cities, like Babylon during Hammurappi's reign (>60,000 residents) or Avaris, capitol of northern Egypt (up to 100,000 inhabitants).<br />
<br />
Clearly, this under-estimation of Bronze-age settlements is not restricted to Troy. The castle of <b>Mycenae</b> encloses no more than a dozen stone-walled buildings; and must have been supported by a major town surrounding its impressive cyclopean walls. Similarly, the Cretan city of <b>Knossos</b> was much more than just the "palace" (the actual city-centre): Some reconstructions depict the excavated buildings lying in a grove of cypress-trees, while this could not be any further from the truth. The outer walls of Knossos (yes, it had walls!) were only found a few decades ago, giving a more realistic impression on how big this city once have been. Knossos was the largest of the excavated Minoan and Mycenaean settlements, with an estimated urban population of 40,000 people.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IjWcWIgKC6I/VvlsMkbqiFI/AAAAAAAABA8/0Eivt0f3QEI6KWoECBLYauWUaO53aFYjg/s1600/View-of-the-lower-city.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="267" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IjWcWIgKC6I/VvlsMkbqiFI/AAAAAAAABA8/0Eivt0f3QEI6KWoECBLYauWUaO53aFYjg/s320/View-of-the-lower-city.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
But if Troy was so large, with well-developed trade relationships and an elaborate culture, why did it lack writing? All the great cities of the era had complex administration systems with written archives: Just think of Mycenae, Knossos, Hattusa or Ugarit. Together with many others, I firmly believe that the Trojans actually did have scribes and recorded their everyday economy and deeds on clay tablets - like all other civilizations of that time. But for some reason, the archives did not survive after the fire that destoyed the Bronze-age city of Troy VI. The architectural history of the Trojan citadel gives the critical key: the upmost sections of the Troy VI-VII citadel are not preserved at all! <br />
<br />
It was not even Schliemann, who removed these sections to expose earlier settlement layers (Troy I-II), but the ancient Greeks themselves. During the hellenistic era, when Troy was rebuilt, the Bronze-age citadel was practically levelled to make place for Greek temples (such as the poorly-preserved <a href="http://cerhas.uc.edu/troy/troy_viii_video.html">Temple of Athena</a>, whose white marble fragments still dot the site). The builders also expanded the hill by systematically dismantling the ruins and using them as landfill, to increase the area of the elevated platform. If the main archives were indeed located in the upmost buildings of the citadel (a likely scenario, in comparison with Pylos and Knossos), then their remnants were irrevocably destroyed in the process. Or perhaps the archaeologists should look for the clay tablets (or rather, their weathered fragments) in the classical-era landfills used to expand the citadel area. Who knows what future excavations might yield there?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-q7C733ffsTs/VvlsPLH_1sI/AAAAAAAABBE/hPozNt94Xpc3jvXXhKMtxbAwsUt7vz-5Q/s1600/Proposed-Trojan-script.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="109" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-q7C733ffsTs/VvlsPLH_1sI/AAAAAAAABBE/hPozNt94Xpc3jvXXhKMtxbAwsUt7vz-5Q/s320/Proposed-Trojan-script.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
With no surviving local archives, one is left to guess
what language and writing system the ancient Troyans used. They may not
have been restricted to single script, either. A well-preserved Luwian
seal, pertaining to a scribe hints at the Anatolian character of Wilusa.
But other finds were also uncovered at the earlier excavations. Among
them, two vessels bearing crude markings that might (and just might)
have been Linear A. These latter finds were even interpreted as a
distinct <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_script">"Trojan script"</a>
by some, with Aegean origins. But building a theory on these sparse
findings is pointless: We have to wait until more inscribed objects are
discovered.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-79553990966807677232016-03-05T12:09:00.000-08:002016-03-07T04:21:50.675-08:00Minoablog - returning after a long hiatusA warm welcome to all readers! After several years in absence, I am finally back to continue exploring the fascinating world of bronze-age Aegean inscriptions. It has been a long time and I feel sorry for those who hoped for a sooner return. In the past years, I finished my PhD studies in molecular and structural biochemistry, published two peer-reviewed articles in a row as well as finally completed and defended my thesis. (Although off-topic, those who are interested at the details, you can read our most recent article <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.15252/msb.20156269/pdf">here</a>. It deals with the language of proteins instead of humans.) Assuming that I shall find time again to do some research into linguistics and epigraphics, I resume blogging on Cretan topics once again. <br />
<br />
<br />
In the near-future, we will embark on a journey to discover the fascinating world of Cypro-Minoan inscriptions, and the ancient Crete-Cyprus connection. I intend to examine both the doubts and the evidence behind the proposed "Aegean" languge family in a critical manner. In addition, we will tackle the archaeological question of how accurate the reconstruction of Bronze-age cities are. We will also go deeper into the world of Hieroglyphic Minoan inscriptions, and re-assess Linear A grammatic elements with an unbiased method. Stay tuned!Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-58508664390572923972012-09-30T14:00:00.000-07:002012-10-01T16:47:55.243-07:00Correcting some errors of mine...Hello again, dear readers! While my tedious lab work has left me very little for pastime activities in 2012, I still managed to make some interesting discoveries in the past months. What is more, I even managed to make a minor breakthrough with the Cretan Hieroglyphs. Thus several Middle Minoan inscriptions have now become not just readable, but also meaningful. To achieve this, I had to correct the reading of several signs: even some signs whose case I previously considered "already solved". During my years of research, I observed that most scientists tend to "fall in love" with their own theories: and that is where trouble starts. After all, you should be critical with your own results, even more so than with the results of others. Only so can you ensure the quality of research you provide.<br />
<br />
As I mentioned earlier, it is very easy to make unintended errors when attempting to decipher a fully-unknown writing system. And - without enough attention - these early assignment errors will become a true pain in the later stages of decipherment. They would definitely cause the entire attempt to derail at a certain point. My earlier work on the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.hu/2010/10/tracking-evolution-of-ka-and-qe-signs.html">identification</a> of potential 'KA' and 'QE' signs in the Cretan Hieroglyphic system is no exception to the rule. It was too late I realized that the sign I attempted to assign to Linear A 'QE' is in fact <i>non-existent</i>! Although endowed with an identifier by Godart and Younger (as if it were a syllabary sign), Hiero *73 seems to be nothing more than the numeral '100' on the hieroglyphic clay tablets. On the stamps, the few dubious instances of Hiero *73 are probably identical to sign *47 (the "sieve" sign) or they are just decorative separators. This leaves my earlier theory nothing short of a fancy speculation. But let us start everything from the beginning!<br />
<br />
Recently I have put quite some work into adding more signs to the list of <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.hu/2011/06/place-names-on-cretan-sealstones-key-to.html">"known"</a> Hieroglyphic Minoan characters. With some luck, I was able to identify the probable counterpart of Linear A '<b>DI</b>' (*07) syllabogram. Now I can state that 'DI' very likely corresponds to the Hiero *11 (the "boucranium") sign.
Where do I pull this conclusion from? As we have seen before many times, a mere similarity between the shapes of Hieroglyphic and Linear A signs can be misleading - due to the very significant time gap between the Knossos Hieroglyphic and Haghia Triada Linear A archives. It is as if we attempted to assign our letter 'P' to the classical Greek '<b><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;">Ρ</span></b>', not paying attention to the lengthy and non-linear development (Greek letter '<span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;">Ρ</span>' is actually <i>rho</i> and corresponds to our letter '<b>R</b>').<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3hgwx03ZAUc/UGiuJ47GWzI/AAAAAAAAAws/YgLk7gQvnr0/s1600/New-Cretan-Hiero-readings-I.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3hgwx03ZAUc/UGiuJ47GWzI/AAAAAAAAAws/YgLk7gQvnr0/s320/New-Cretan-Hiero-readings-I.png" width="241" /></a></div>
<br />
What I apply now is a combined approach based on not just the graphical design of signs, but also on their tendencies to form certain <i>lexeme units</i>. One can note that occurrances of a given open syllable are not random in any language, but they obey certain statistics governing their appearence in a given position relative to other syllables in words. Mathematicians would call my approach "<i>entropy minimalisation</i>". I observed that sign Hiero *11 is very common in not just word-initial positions, but also directly before signs Hiero *56 (= 'NA') and Hiero *29 (possibly 'NI'). All these features are true to the Linear A 'DI' sign as well, probably stemming from the high frequency of the (closed) syllable written as '<b>DI-N</b>'- in the Minoan language.<br />
<br />
The reading of Hiero *11 sign as '<b>DI</b>' gives words that can directly be paralleled with Linear A forms. As it is trivial for clay bars and medals, most if not all the terms mentioned are names (sometimes with titles). These are mostly hapaxes, even in Linear B. Thus the best one can prove is that the words share their stem, but not their complete form. Such examples include the term <b>A-WA-DI</b> in Hieroglyphics, paralleling the name WA-DI-NI in Linear A (it is unclear whether the latter is a personal or a place-name). It is also notable, that there are plenty of hieroglyphic documents containing the phrase <b>DI-NA</b>. This recalls an interesting word - probably a place-name - in Linear A: DI-NA-U [HT9, HT16, HT25], often <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.hu/2011/11/riddles-in-linear-part-i.html">abbreviated</a> as just 'DI' on the Haghia Triada tablets [e.g. HT85]. Although the occurrance of the name DI-NA-U on a vessel at Knossos [KN Zb27] suggests potential northern Cretan affinities for this place, so far I was unable to suggest any further identification. One may also read another familiar term in Cretan Hieroglyphics: <b>WI-DI-NI</b>, closely resembling a personal name mentioned on the Haghia Triada tablets: WI-DI-NA [a hapax on HT 28]. Despite all my earlier <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.hu/2010/07/mother-in-minoan-aegean-words-for.html">fancy theries</a>, Hiero *37 could reasonably be identified with Linear A '<b>WI</b>', yielding the reading above. On one bar, we can find the same signs in a permuted order, giving the reading <b>DI-NI-WI</b> instead of WI-DI-NI. Could this be an early form of Linear A DI-NA-U? There are still so many open questions lingering around hieroglyphic documents!<br />
<br />
Still, despite all the above identifications and speculations, an uncomfortable feeling remains. There were no <i>identical</i> phrases in both Hieroglyphics and Linear A, reading with 'DI'. So we still need a better example to ascertain this value. When browsing through the CHIC volume, I came upon a little piece of clay from Knossos (CHIC #45) with an interesting text. There are no logograms on this medallion, as common in Linear A. Nor there are any word-dividers, thus we should read both of its sides as a single phrase. The word definitely spells ?-?-TA-RE (the two last syllabary signs are certain), and now we are in the position to read its initial syllable as 'DI'. But what could the last unidentified syllable be? A value with 'K' would fit very aptly there, with the most appropriate value being 'KA'. This way, the inscription shall read as <b>DI-KA-TA-RE</b> !<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7AhbuFDIDPQ/UGiuLsA5T9I/AAAAAAAAAw0/5_mzAEPsMxI/s1600/Hieroglyphic-inscriptions-I.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="279" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7AhbuFDIDPQ/UGiuLsA5T9I/AAAAAAAAAw0/5_mzAEPsMxI/s320/Hieroglyphic-inscriptions-I.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Mentions of the sacred mountain <b>Dikte</b> are common in Linear A sources: we have already seen versions like JA-DI-KI-TE-TE- and A-DI-KI-TE-TE- as well as JA-DI-KI-TU on the libation tablets. Linear B sources refer to the place as DI-KA-TA. What we see here is a form similar to the Linear B nominative case, but endowed with a typical Minoan suffix (<i>*-ale</i>) denoting origin, as commonly seen on Linear A tablets (e.g. compare A-MI-DA-U [ZA10] with JA-MI-DA-RE [HT122]). Although the reading is dubious due to the low quality characters, another medallion from Knossos (CHIC #47) may also contain a word <b>DI-DI-KA</b> on one of its sides. If correct, this would exactly be the same as the stem of a Linear A word written on a Zakros vessel (ZA Zb3): DI-DI-KA-SE, dealing with wine, similarly to CHIC #47.<br />
<br />
Now we are in the situation, that we need to prove the reading of Hiero *77 as 'KA' in order to validate all these hypotheses. Fortunately, the hieroglyphic archives contain plenty of names: place names and personal names alike. Sometimes these words are written in an alternative form: the same phenomenon has been an important tool for the clarification of phonetic values in Linear B. Although at a limited extent, this approach is also useful for Hieroglyphics. I was able to come across such an intriguing pair of names in Cretan Hieroglyphic. One of the documents, a clay medallion from Knossos contains a separate word (name) on one of its sides that might read as SA?-*77-NI. On the other hand, a seal impression from Mesara (near Phaistos) features a very similar name: SA?-KI-NI. The only difference is the middle sign: and this is actually explainable if the original name was something like <i>*Sakni</i>. Resolving the *-kn- cluster one way around would give <b>SA-KA-NI</b> (progressive spelling), the other way the result would be <b>SA-KI-NI</b> (regressive spelling). <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ovmpU3nHltU/UGi9Cw-18qI/AAAAAAAAAxU/cruZ9yA5u7Q/s1600/New-Cretan-Hiero-readings-II.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="297" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ovmpU3nHltU/UGi9Cw-18qI/AAAAAAAAAxU/cruZ9yA5u7Q/s320/New-Cretan-Hiero-readings-II.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Time has come to mention another notable inscription. I discovered a spectacular specimen when checking the <a href="http://dbas.sciant.unifi.it/CMpro-v-p-1.html">DBAS database</a> for Hieroglyphic sealstones containing this very character. The seal in question is CHIC #200 (found at Malia) and it is no boasting to call this fine piece of jewellery the <i>"Royal Seal of Malia"</i>, you shall immediately see why. The stone seal is unusual in a certain sense that - although it is drilled in the middle and made to be rotated, it has only one flat side that is actually inscribed. Unexpectedly, the "start sign" (that designates the first word to be read) is also in the middle of the line. However, the crowded placement of signs (the two last signs are on top of each other) suggests an alternative arrangement: the inscription might run in a circle!<br />
<br />
Using our corrected phonetic values, the first word of this masterwork seal would read <b>WA-NA-KA</b>. This is the same word that Linear B used for the title of a king (<i>wanax</i> in Mycenaean Greek)! Although <i>wanax</i> (stem: <i>wanakt-</i>, behaving as a heteroclite in Classical Greek with a <i>-t-</i> extension) is sometimes believed to be a Pre-Greek loanword, this is the first time we see it in pure Minoan context. Finally, the last sign of the line can be read together with the first one if the inscription is circular; this could be another term specifying the kingdom. This last sign has a somewhat dubious interpretation. Most scholars would read it with the value "JA" without question, but this is not the only possible reading, and might not be the correct one, either. For this instance of Hiero *38 (that could also be Hiero *39) also resembles Linear A "PA3". Plugging that into the Hieroglyphic script yields a very familiar place-name: PA3-NI, mentioned about half a dozen times at Haghia Triada [HT6, HT85, HT93, HT102], and also at other places, like the peak sanctuary at Syme [SY Za4].<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OOLhon92s8s/UGiuPoKkzNI/AAAAAAAAAxE/5oMykkTXZQY/s1600/Hieroglyphic-inscriptions-II.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OOLhon92s8s/UGiuPoKkzNI/AAAAAAAAAxE/5oMykkTXZQY/s320/Hieroglyphic-inscriptions-II.png" width="237" /></a></div>
<br />
Based on the co-occurrances of <b>PA3-NI</b> with other names, it could already be <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.hu/2011/06/new-map-of-middle-minoan-crete.html">mapped</a> to mid-central Crete (it seldom groups with western Cretan places, and never with more eastern towns like SE-TO-I-JA or KI-TA-NA). Very tentatively, I placed it to Gournia, but Malia would have been an equally good candiate. Now we see the first hint that PA3-NI could have been the ancient name for Malia, and that Malia was a separate kingdom into itself (it had a WA-NA-KA of its own). This is very well in-line with the results of archaeologic research, suggesting that Crete was politically fragmented during the Minoan era into at least four small souvereign city-states or kingdoms, with no central "Minoan" authority whatsoever.<br />
<br />
How much do these minor discoveries add to our understanding of Cretan Hieroglyphics? I hope that these bits of information shall be crucial in the future to fully decipher the first known Aegean script. Unfortunately, we still do not have a "critical mass" of known signs. If we had them, they could hopefully start a true chain reaction, suddenly turning all the remaining signs readable - as happened to Michael Ventris, after he plugged in a critical number of correctly-identified Linear B signs into the grids of Alice Kober. But before we reach that point: well, research must continue!Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-3181132717875322942012-04-30T03:30:00.001-07:002012-05-03T15:42:09.853-07:00Exploring the Cretan numeral systemAfter a lenghty pause, I returned to present some brand-new results of my research. This time, I shall be slightly off-topic, and instead of linguistics, we shall examine the ancient Cretan measurement and numeral systems. Roughly half a year ago, I turned my attention to the still-unresolved questions around the Minoan numeral system. It took quite a lot of comparative research, between Linear A tablets, and even the more extensive Linear B archives, to come to some firm conclusions. Instead of wild guesses like I made before, it is now time to present some coherent theory. I hope you enjoy it!<br />
<br />
Like in the lands of Sumer and ancient Egypt, accounting and writing evolved hand-in-hand and thus numeric characters were intergral part of ancient writing systems. Similar in concept to the Egyptian numbers, but not in shape, the Minoan-Mycenaean system was also decimal. The sign of '1' was a simple vertical stroke. Higher numbers consisted of multiple strokes: two for '2', three for '3', etc. In case of discretely countable entities (e.g. people or animals), these signs denote plain numbers, while in the case of goods like grain, figs or oil, the situation is less trivial (more about this later). Different magnitudes have different characters. The sign for '10' is a simple horizontal stroke. Typtically, this precedes the lesser digits, as Minoan and Mycenaean scribes also made some limited use of positional notation. Number '100' is written as an empty circle. A 'radiant circle' denotes '1000'. There is even a sign for '10,000', a radiant circle filled with a horizontal stroke inside. There are too few examples in Linear A to ascertain the latter values, but since '1' and '10' look exactly the same as in Linear B, it is rather trivial to identify the rest of the integer signs as well. Unlike the rather complex measurement systems of ancient Mesopotamia, Minoans did not have separate counting systems for different goods. The same integer numbers could be applied to items measured by wet volume (e.g. wine, olive-oil), dry volume (grain, figs) or weight (metals). I spent quite some time in the past months, eyeing the Cretan tablets eagerly for any small difference between the ways separate types of goods were catalogued. Yet I failed to find any. <br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-w2ivCYTzCWc/T50tBZNid9I/AAAAAAAAArs/nZW7Q-YJ0Oo/s1600/Minoan-fractional-signs.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-w2ivCYTzCWc/T50tBZNid9I/AAAAAAAAArs/nZW7Q-YJ0Oo/s320/Minoan-fractional-signs.png" width="214" /></a></div>
<br />
To understand how Cretans were able to use essentially the same measure system for fluids and solids we should examine how later Hellenes did define their measurement units. It seems that everything revolved around a base unit, the quantity of water a single amphore could hold. The volume of an "average" Greek amphore differed from place-to-place, but was roughly about 19 to 36 litres. This is suspiciously close to the Minoan volume unit restored based on a vessel from Zakros (ZA Zb 3). An inscription mentioning 32 units runs below its rim; the actual volume of the pithos is slightly above 1000 litres. If it was meant to be full, the Minoan volume unit is around 32 litres; if not, it is somewhat smaller (29-31 L). Equally, this integer unit could also denote a weight of 29-32 kilograms, since the density of water (or wine) is 1.0 g/cm<sup>3</sup>. Ancient Greeks also defined their mass units based on this hypothetical standard amphore: the weight of its water content equalled one talent. The talent was further sub-divided into 60 minas, following the ancient Mesopotamian tradition of 60-based systems. For a Minoan scribe, it must have been trivial to switch between specimen numbers, volumes and weights using this simple and easy-to-learn system of counting by amphores.<br />
<br />
While the system of integers is simple, nice and succint, the fractional units are unexpectedly complex. Both the earlier Minoans and later Mycenaeans used a high number of fractional signs to express quantities less than their (rather large) base units. Yet here the two systems are rather divergent: Mycenaean fractional units are usually specialized to measure different goods by either volume or weight, while this is not the case for Minoan fractions. But the two systems are not as radically different as one might think - we shall see this soon enough. Since ancient peoples had no knowledge of irrational numbers, all non-integer quantities typically denote simple, rational fractions (e.g. 1/2, 3/4, 2/5, etc.). Any quantity that was smaller than the unit, was to be approximated by a sum of these fractions. Egyptians preferred the use of fractions of the form <i>1/n</i> (<i>n</i> = any natural number). One does not need to be a mathematician to prove that if we defined <i>1/n</i>-type signs for all <i>n</i><<i>N</i>, using a sufficiently high <i>N</i>, all quantities can be approximated arbitrarily well with this system. So we only need a finite number of fractional signs, if it is our objective to measure with a fixed error margin.<br />
<br />
The most common fraction seen in Linear A is named <b>'J'</b>, graphically looking like a "lesser than" sign. This is - obviously - the one for 1/2. There are plenty of tablets with totals (e.g. HT9, HT104, etc.) to demonstrate that. The second most common fraction is labelled <b>'E'</b>, it looks like an almost exact mirror of 'J'. This has (you could have guessed it) the value 1/4. The next symbol in this series is a bit more tricky. Sign <b>'F'</b> looks like 'E' with a horizontal line crossing it in the middle, thus symbolically cutting it in half. To show that this one is 1/8, we also have direct proof: <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2012/01/riddles-in-linear-part-ii.html">on tablet HT8</a>, there are two fraction 'F's following two well-established names (QA-*310-I and PA-JA-RE) thus they need to add up to 'E' in order to make that calculation work.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ywNoNf7gIwY/T50s8CxwG6I/AAAAAAAAArc/BSLf3w40c1Y/s1600/Minoan-accounting-tablet-fractions.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="311" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ywNoNf7gIwY/T50s8CxwG6I/AAAAAAAAArc/BSLf3w40c1Y/s320/Minoan-accounting-tablet-fractions.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
With a little luck, we can even identify the sign <b>'H'</b> as 1/6. Tablet HT123+124 features *122 and *308 quantities for each name, being nicely proportional (3:1) to each other for practically all lines. You can see this on my reconstruction above. Based upon the considerably high quantities, *122 (= RA3, "LAI") is probably OLIV (olives), and not CROC (saffron), the only other Linear B logogram similar to it; but there is no hint on the identity of *308. Due to the fragmentary nature of this tablet, it is not the easiest thing to reconstruct the exact numbers that once stood in each entry; yet the end totals give enough constraints (in the form of an equation system) to fix most illegible fields. To make this work, one has to propose, however, that the scribe sometimes disregarded the positional notations when making calculations (there is ample evidence that the same happened on side B of the very same document). If we also assume that the scribe made no errors upon totalling, there is only one correct solution, that you can see on my facsimile. Interestingly enough, the tablet - if read properly - yields evidence on the existence of a sign with 1/12 value. As the sign 'X' (Godart & Olivier) on the end of the second line is more plausibly read 1+'A', this strongly suggests that sign 'A' had the value 1/12.<br />
<br />
Finding out the exact value of other fractions is more tricky. For example, there are the 'B' and 'D' series of fractions - both reasonably common. Obviously, one would expect fractions with a higher value (lower denominator) to be more prominetly featured than quantities below 1/10. This would mean that the fractions 1/3 and 1/5 be the most common. As there are not many ancient numeral systems putting a stress on 1/7 and 1/9 fractions, these ones were probably rare in Mycenaean and Minoan contexts - if existent at all. This leaves us on a quest to find out how to match the 'D' and 'B' series to derivatives of 1/3 and 1/5.<br />
<br />
We have very little information on the true value of the <b>'D'</b> sign (looks like the Latin letter 'S') and the related doubling <b>'DD'</b>. John Younger tried to pursue the idea that these are exclusively dry weight measures - based on their close similarity to the Mycenaean 'M' sign used for metals or wool; but none of the tablets support Younger's conclusions. 'D' and 'DD' are seen with every imaginable type of goods, even with olive-oil. This indicates that it was a generic fraction, not exclusive to - say - cereals. Others (Dieter Rumple) suggested the value 1/5 - again, without any convincing proof. That idea solely relies on a single tablet (HT115), where a quadrupling of the base fraction unit (DDDD) can be read. As for me, after a thorough research, I came to the conclusion that the value of 'D' is probably 1/3. 'DD' would therefore be 2/3. As for 'DDDD' (4/3), one must see that similar overshoots are rare, but definitely do exist on several tablets (JJ=2/2 [PH9, PH22], EE=2/4 [PH12, PH13]). Now, if 'D' is indeed simply 1/3, it can also nicely explain the graphical image of fraction 'H' = 1/6. Numeral 'H' looks as if it were carrying the upper half of 'D', divided by a line below. Similar to the way 'F' = 1/8 was built, its graphical image actually shows (1/3) / 2 = 1/6 ! Linear B documents have a similar sign to represent a (wet volume) unit ('S'), that might indicate a quantity 1/6 instead of the previously proposed 1/3 (by Chadwick). It probably evolved from a mirrored version of Linear A fraction 'H'; similarly to the way the Mycenaean fraction 'V' seems to correspond to the Minoan 'L' family of fractions. <br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_BPP-0OcAdI/T50s_Klj_MI/AAAAAAAAArk/6dkMYO2cMRA/s1600/Minoan-accounting-tablet-fractions-II.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_BPP-0OcAdI/T50s_Klj_MI/AAAAAAAAArk/6dkMYO2cMRA/s320/Minoan-accounting-tablet-fractions-II.png" width="250" /></a></div>
<br />
The <b>'B'</b>-series of fractional numerals is definitely more complicated than the 'D'-series. 'B' looks like a plain cross. <b>'BB'</b> is a simple doubling of 'B', but there are also a couple of signs ('K', 'A', 'X', 'W') that resemble the shape of 'B'. How many of these are related to the base sign 'B' is still an open question. Fortunately, this time we do have some solid evidence on our hands for the value of 'B', albeit meager in quantity. Tablet KH7 appear to contain food rations shared among a fixed number of people. The rather strict proportinality straightforwardly implies that 'B' is in fact 1/5. While different tablets seem to employ slightly different food shares per person, we can probably accept that on the same table, rations are more likely to be fixed. Interestingly enough, two closely related Haghia Triada tablets (HT16 and HT20) - both mentioning a list of animal products - appear to list goods proportionally to one another (WA:*188+KU = 1:2), if but only if 'B' = 0.19 ~ 0.2 = 1/5! 'B' definitely follows both 'J' [KH5, KH6, KH17] and 'E' [KH9] on the tablets, thus (from the positional notation) suggesting that it is indeed < 1/4. <br />
<br />
Sign <b>'K'</b> is one probably related to 'B'. Its appearance is indistinguishable from the Linear B fraction 'T', of a value 1/10. Graphically, it is just the lower half of sign 'B' (1/5). Earlier, this sign was assumed to have a value as small as 1/16, based on a flawed piece of 'evidence': the graffito on the wall of a house at the Haghia Triada site (HT Zd 155). It was interpreted by some authors (Pope, Olivier, Stieglitz) as a geometric series. I examined that piece eagerly, but much to my dismay, it is just another piece of 'wishful thinking'. The "inscription" is nothing but a maze of purely vertical and horizontal lines. There is probably no fraction 'K' there at all, and the two last signs (that were even transliterated by J. Younger as TA-JA) are nothing but speculations (note that these signs consist exclusively of vertical and horizontal lines). So I must reject any identification of fraction 'K' as the half of sign 'F', and rather insist on inferring its value from the Mycenaean counterpart (very likely 1/10).<br />
<br />
Quantities <b>'A'</b>, <b>'X'</b>, and <b>'W'</b> are pretty mysterious. All these appear to be rather small. (Note that the reading 'ABB' on KH 86 is apperently faulty, the entire number is likely just a single 'X'.) Although I previously pursued the idea that sign 'A' might be related to the 'B' series (1/5 based), now I uncovered pieces of evidence (see the restoration of tablet HT123-124) that it could plausibly be just 1/12. While fraction 'A' has no Mycenaean counterpart, fraction 'X' corresponds to a Linear B weight unit 'N', used for metals or wool. Since it would not make much sense to propose sign 'X' to be another 1/6 quantity, this leaves it unidentified for now. No matter how well this would fit the proportion M:N = (2/3) / (1/6) = 4, as in Linear B. Fraction 'W' is only seen on a small number of Khania tablets (KH12, KH60, KH61, KH77), offering no clue for its value.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HzdryBfWVtU/T50tDxZVXMI/AAAAAAAAAr0/LAWvqW8cDO4/s1600/Mycenaean-measurement-systems.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="282" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HzdryBfWVtU/T50tDxZVXMI/AAAAAAAAAr0/LAWvqW8cDO4/s320/Mycenaean-measurement-systems.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
The smallest units ever used on Linear A are - no doubt - the so-called <b>'L'</b>-series of signs. This is the only instance where signs are supplemented with counting-strokes on their right side in Linear A (this was customary in Linear B for all fractions, though). The very base unit (that has no counting stroke) is called 'L', but it was seldom employed. It is much more commonly used with 2 strokes <b>(L2</b>), 4 strokes (<b>L4</b>) or even 6 strokes (<b>L6</b>). L5 is never found, and L3 is rare as well (the only unambiguous example stems from a single Middle Minoan Knossos tablet). Again, we have no direct proof for their values. This opens up the place for wild speculations. Formally, the fact that L3 and L5 are disfavoured, would suggest that the denominator of L-fractions (if common) was divisible by both 3 and 5. The smallest such number is 15. The problem here is that L2 very commonly follows fraction 'K' on the Khania tablets, that would make little sense in terms of magnitudes (as 2/15 > 1/10, obviously). On the other hand, the L-series of fractions are apparently related to the Linear B quantity 'V', sometimes termed 'choinix', based on the similarity of 'Z' and 'V' fractions to the classical Greek<i> </i>κοτύλη and χοῖνιξ volume units. The problem there is that their proportion to the base unit ('1') is not fixed, but different for fluids and solids, giving no candidate number for the denominator of Linear A fraction 'L'. (You can see a sketch of the Mycenaean systems above.) John Younger attempted to use Khania tablet KH7 (that you could also see a few paragraphs before), to fix the value of L2 at 3/20. But this complex value would make little sense. Also, the numbers in the penultimate entry reconstructed by Godart are probably slightly faulty (it likely mentions 37 people, not 38). Yet the next line may feature the text KI-RO (badly damaged). If so, then L2 and L6 must ad up to 1/10. If they have the same base denominator (that is probable), then L = 1/80. This would also offer an alternative explanation why examples with an odd number of strokes were rare: because it was used primarily to express 1/40 units (L2 = 1/40, L4 = 2/40, L6 = 3/40, according to this theory). Note that L2 is reasonably common with grain portions (especially at Khania). In Linear B, the daily meal of an average worker was three 'kotylai' (Z3), that might be corresponding to exactly unit 'L' in the Minoan system.<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Other fractions still exist in Linear A contexts: they are still unresolved, and will probably remain so. Such ones are fraction <b>'Y'</b> (seen only at Phaistos [PH26]) and fraction <b>'Ω'</b> (seen as a vessel-qualifier at Malia [MA10]). There might have been graphically distinct fractional signs for all numbers of a form <i>1/n</i> for sufficiently high integers - say <i>n</i> < 20, but numbers that were rarely used (as they were of a prime <i>n</i> or they did not match the procession of any quantity) were unlikely to appear in regular accounting. While fraction Y might have been something like 1/7, with the lack of evidence, it will essentially remain undeciphered in the end.</div>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Thus we have seen that - while there are still many unsolved problems in ancient Aegean metrology, some questions may be answered with pure logic and deduction. This also applies to the Mycenaean units. Encouraged by the Minoan discoveries, I made slight changes to the metric procession of Linear B dry and wet units. You can see this on the table above. With the different densities of water and (ground) grain taken into consideration, this system now perfectly meets all expectations of precise metrics. The only thing that needed changing was unit 'S' (now proposed to be 1/6 instead of 1/3). While Kim Raymoure's <a href="http://minoan.deaditerranean.com/linear-b-transliterations/">Linear B database</a> offered no example of S3, S4 or S5, this only means that 'S' ≤ 1/3. And this is what we have to contend for the time being. Unless we are willing to bravely attempt to fill in the gaps in our current knowledge.</div>Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-45978594634936014952012-01-03T17:40:00.000-08:002012-01-03T17:40:21.853-08:00Riddles in Linear A - Part IIHappy New Year to everyone! I hope you enjoyed my last post about hard-to decipher Linear A tablets. Now we shall examine some even more mysterious ancient documents: those ones that can only be understood if we analyse not just the names - but the numbers standing beside them. It is now time for some mathematics!<br />
<br />
The most obvious problem one can encounter when reading Minoan clay tablets is the lack of knowledge about the transaction terms themselves. After all, how can we understand anything about Cretan accounting, if we do not even know if the goods mentioned were actually collected or - on the contrary - distributed? Our path is clear: to understand more of the meaning of the tablets, we have to analyse the quantities of wares.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1Q9j9jvDUaQ/TwOsuJaPNVI/AAAAAAAAAq8/WC0eahfXAYQ/s1600/HT8-tablet-reading.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left:1em; margin-right:1em"><img border="0" height="238" width="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1Q9j9jvDUaQ/TwOsuJaPNVI/AAAAAAAAAq8/WC0eahfXAYQ/s320/HT8-tablet-reading.png" /></a></div><br />
Let our first specimen to study be the clay tablet <b>HT8</b> (see figure). This tablet is fortunately complete, and written with easily readable characters. But it still somehow lacks in clarity. Judged from the absence of any totalling term (KU-RO), it likely lists outgoing goods: the headers seem to list the total stockpile of <i>oil</i> (OLE+KI) to be distributed. The modifier 'KI' might point to a type of "scented oil" (e.g. <i>rose-scented</i> or <i>sage-scented</i>) that was sent to sanctuaries of gods all across the land on certain annual festivals - if we can believe the Linear B tablets already deciphered by Ventris and Chadwick. The distribution patterns on HT8 are quite intriguing on their own, and may admit more than one possible solution. At least some of the entries must be transaction terms, otherwise the numbers would not work. The most trivial solution to the problem was found by Brent Davis & John Younger. But this is not the only possible one. You shall also see my rival hypothesis on the same figure.<br />
<br />
The main strength of the original solution is the ability to interpret both sides of the tablet as complete and integrated entity. However, Davis & Younger needed to assume two transaction terms to achieve this goal - both the sole 'PA' syllabogram and the hapax word SU-PU2-*188. Although a single 'PA' returns on other documents, no other tablet supports their reading as transaction terms. On the other hand, most names clearly recur on other tablets, such as <b>PA-JA-RE</b> [HT29, HT88, ZA10], <b>TE-WE</b> [HT98] or <b>QA-*310-I</b> [HT85, HT122]. HT85 even features a similar single-syllable 'PA' term. However, on the toponym list HT85, 'PA' probably abbreviates PA-I-TO, the name of <i>Phaistos</i>. It is tempting to believe that the same applies to the place-name list on HT10, where a toponym tied to KU-NI-SU (<i>Knossos?</i>) is contrasted to a list headed by 'PA' (tributaries to <i>Phaistos?</i>). To remedy the situation, I played around the numbers to find an even better solution to this tablet. As you can see on the figure, if we split the document into two almost-separate lists (with 15 units of oil to distribute, instead of 10), we only have to assume the existence of a single transaction term on side B. <b>KA-PA</b> is a more-or less obvious candidate: it also returns on the headers of tablets HT6, HT94, HT102 and HT105. On HT11 and HT140 we also find a counting term 'KA' (abbreviation, KA-PA?) that frequently stands beside large quantities without any names mentioned. KA-PA is likely related to another word: <b>KA-PE</b> [HT9], that is undoubtedly a transaction term, and stands as contrasted to SA-RO2 on the same tablet. Note that KA-PA itself can form a single expression with SA-RA2 (as on HT102), but it never-ever joins up with A-DU (another common term alongside SA-RA2). <br />
<br />
To understand the complementarity and mutual exclusivity of these transaction terms, we must make some assumptions on their meanings first. <b>SA-RA2</b>, one of the most common transaction terms on the Haghia Triada tablets could be cautiously translated as "<i>supplies</i>" (note that it almost always stands before a list of consumables, most typically GRA [wheat]). I chose the word "supplies" to avoid any explicit implications to incoming or outgoing transactions - that are often difficult or impossible to guess. As for <b>A-DU</b>, after a thorough study, I find the reading of John Younger (A-DU = "<i>assessed</i>") really enticing. Now, if <b>KA-PA</b> would mean something like "<i>leftover</i>", "<i>remaining</i>", we could now explain entire phrases: A-DU • SA-RA2 [HT99] = "<i>assessed supplies</i>", TE • A-DU [HT92, HT133] = "<i>give (as) expected</i>" KA-PA • SA-RA2 [HT102] = "<i>remaining supplies</i>", SA-RO2 = "<i>supplied</i>", in contrast to KA-PE = "<i>of what remains</i>". KA-PA can be used with a wide variety of goods, even people [HT94, HT105], in which case, they are counted by type (profession) and not by provenience. On HT102, KA-PA stands before a very substantial number of GRA: 976 units - that would be about 32,000 litres of wheat if measured by volume - likely the whole stockpile of an entire settlement. There is even a Classic Greek word: <b>κάπηλος</b> of prehellenic origins, meaning "local wholesale merchant" (i.e. who dealt in the surplus goods a community produced), that could possibly be connected with KA-PA / KA-PE.<br />
<br />
It is also important to examine the dual 'PA3' syllables that start each sub-list. Since the tablet completely lacks word-dividers, these particles might form separate words. Unlike 'PA', the abbreviation 'PA3' (whose reading as a member of the P-series is only weakly supported in Linear B) is a well-attested transaction term (HT9, HT34, HT103, HT132). Its occurrance on HT103 in particular, suggests a reading like 'delivery'.<br />
<br />
Tablet HT8 is also interesting because of a completely different reason: it features the rare sign <b>Lin A *188</b> twice. While *188 also stands as a separate word (abbreviation of a name?) on several documents (HT15, HT56, HT103, HT123, HTWc3014, HTWb229), not just on HT8, here it also recurs as part of a longer word: SU-PU2-*188. This is particularly intruguing because of the phonological character of 'PU2'. That is quite a special syllabogram, as its use in words DA-PU2-RI-TO-JO (Lin B <i>*daburinthoyo</i>) and DU-PU2-RE (Lin A <i>*duphre?</i>) shows: unlike the ordinary 'PU', its consonant might have been at least partially voiced, possibly due to external triggers [clustering with thrills or nasals]. This realization may imply sign *188 being of the the N-series. Interestingly, the N-series has a very obvious hole in it in Linear A: the ancestor and Minoan counterpart of Linear B *42 ('NO') has not yet been identified. Now we have a plausible candidate - but this topic clearly deserves its own post, so I shall leave it to later. Nevertheless, a reading SU-PU2-NO (<i>*suphnú</i>) speaks for itself, and even resembles to the modern name of the island <i>Siphnos</i> - known to be an important economic center (thanks to its precious metal mines) of the Cyclades in the Bronze Age and later. Though it is also true that the naval distance between southern Crete and Siphnos is substantial, so a direct identification is questionable at best.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MjyNWrrfpzg/TwOs6JsOPqI/AAAAAAAAArI/dzQD0W1WYY8/s1600/HT103-tablet-reading.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left:1em; margin-right:1em"><img border="0" height="243" width="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MjyNWrrfpzg/TwOs6JsOPqI/AAAAAAAAArI/dzQD0W1WYY8/s320/HT103-tablet-reading.png" /></a></div><br />
Now, let us turn to our attention to another piece of numeric riddles. Tablet HT103 offers an equally difficult puzzle as our previous one was. Although HT103 is slightly damaged at its right edge (rendering some signs only partially legible), it is preserved well enough to enable a clear reading without major reconstructions. The first sign on the header is abraded, but - if we can believe the reconstruction of J. Younger (that I also find plausible) - the first word was probably <b>U-TA2</b>. Note that a tablet written by the same scribal hand (HT26) features a very similarly shaped 'U' sign that we reconstructed here. U-TA2 would be a hapax term, albeit it resembles to both an alternative reading of KN10 (inital word: TA-NU-TA2-TI) and to the supposed Eteocretan term '<i>utat</i>'. Potential tyrrhenian parallels (Etruscan *<i>ut-</i>/*<i>uth-</i> = "to deliver") would indicate a transaction term, having to do something with distribution of goods. Indeed, the header continues with the logogram 'NI' (figs) and a number of 40. Since there is no totalling term anywhere below (although we have KI-RA for missing units), and all the numerals on the tablet are considerably smaller than 40, it appears to be recording the act of distribution. <br />
<br />
The key to understanding is provided by the obervation that practically all quantities recorded are multiples of 6.5: Number 13 (third line) is the double of this base portion, and the single unit mentioned in the last line also gives 1+5.5 = 6.5, if we add the missing 5.5. The tablet apparently records an attempt to distribute the initial 40 units of figs into 6 smaller, equal units. This gave a standard unit (with the qualifier <b>DA-KU-SE-NE</b>) of 6.5, and the double unit (qualifier: *188) of 13. Since 40 = 6 x 6.5 + 1, the remaining 1 unit of fruits is distributed as a portion , with the premise that 5.5 would be paid later. The initial segment of line two has broken off, but - judged from the inclination of signs - a syllabogram must have been there before the number, probably 'TI' (c.f. <b>DA-KU-SE-NE-TI</b> [HT104]). <b>DA-KU-NA</b> appears to be just another grammatic case of DA-KU-SE-NE, with a defective writing (*DA-KU-SA-NA) - this points to DA-KU-SE-NE being something like <i>*takusne</i>.<br />
<br />
Now we have seen that - with ample effort - many of the tablets can be given a fairly meaningful reading. Unfortunately, I lack the time and resources to continue on this path and examine each tablet separately, but I promise to come up with other Cretan topics soon. Including the revision of some of my earlier theories.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-88816198412132401552011-11-12T16:00:00.000-08:002011-11-12T16:32:45.298-08:00Riddles in Linear A - Part II am pleased to announce that I managed to make a further post on this little blog. In the recent months, I browsed through quite a few original Linear A tablets (I mean, the "original" photographs), in an attempt to make the classification of certain signs more systhematic. Given the paucity of my free time, that project is still ongoing. But in the meanwhile, I also came upon many documents, whose reading and interpretation is quite tricky: Sometimes even well-established scholars were fooled by these muddled tablets. So I decided to share some of these minute discoveries with you, while I keep on analysing the other tablets to get (hopefully) some major results. <br />
<br />
Basically, there can be several problems with the reading of a Linear A document (I assumed that you are familiar enough with the Aegean syllabaries in order to be able to read it): First, the tablet can be physically damaged, or be rendered illegible by improper scribal work (erasures, corrections). But even if it is otherwise well readable, the compressed context (and hard-to-interpret words) can make reading a real nightmare. I decided to break this lengthy topic into two parts: so I shall leave the "logical games" for the next time.<br />
<br />
To begin, let us take a look at the tablet <b>HT6</b>. This is a tablet with quite a mixed context: <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/01/commodities-on-linear-tablets-part-i.html">Side A</a> lists a variety of commodities (probably foodstuffs: figs and other edible materials) linked to a few names, while the tablet clearly switches to a simple list (of one commodity) on side B. To be more precise, this change in context already starts on the first side, following the entry referring to goods associated to the name DA-QE-RA. All the further entries on side B thus must refer to either <b>PI-TA</b> (bread?) or <b>NI</b> (figs), due to the <a href="http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/#7c">"continuity principle"</a> (as established by J. Younger). Though we cannot determine the exact goods, it is certain that all the names mentioned are somehow connected to food supplies. A few entries are definitely references to towns. Unfortunately, it cannot be decided whether some of the names are personal ones or all refer to places; though they could also plausibly be a mixture of these two. Nevertheless, tablet HT6 shall be a good example to illustrate how damage (wear, abrasion, breaks and missing pieces) cause problems in reading.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-A_Me85TahC4/Trr4ZGvgAxI/AAAAAAAAAqM/4w0XZG3sIak/s1600/HT6-riddle.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left:1em; margin-right:1em"><img border="0" height="320" width="260" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-A_Me85TahC4/Trr4ZGvgAxI/AAAAAAAAAqM/4w0XZG3sIak/s320/HT6-riddle.png" /></a></div><br />
<br />
On side B, the first two names are easy to make out, but problems start to mount from the third one onwards. This term (name) spells at first sight as MA-RI-?-I (reading suggested by Olivier, Godart & Younger). It is pretty hard to identify the third sign of this sequence. It looks faintly like a malformed 'I', although the Lin A *28 signs never have a downward-directed right stroke like this. Olivier and Godart tried to suggest 'RE' (this is also how they presented it on the GORILA's official facsimile), but the sad truth is, it is nowhere near *27 (RE) in shape. Because of these difficulties, John Younger did not even try to read this sign. I also suggest the dear reader to ponder a bit on the problem before looking at the solution.<br />
<br />
The answer to this question is provided by a simple observation. The table is badly abraded at both of its right and left side on many spots. That's why the baseline of the 'RI' sign is missing. But the same abrasion also covers the lower left end of our mysterious sign. Only a very faint crack is left. Once we draw that small trace with full width, we get the answer. The "mystery sign" is nothing but an ordinary 'KE', a bit damaged, but still legible. One should also note that the 'I' sign is in fact not a plain Lin A *28, but - observing the strokes above its right extension - it is the sign what Godart and Olivier labelled as *28b. Based on its distinct usage pattern, and its undeniable similarity to Linear B *43 (I3 or AI), I would propose to read it as 'JI'. The difference between this and the ordinary 'I' might be negligible, but 'JI' would fit the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2009/09/junction-effects-in-linear-script.html">junctional rules</a> (E-I → E-J) a slightly bit better. These observations yield the reading <b>MA-RI-KE-JI</b> for this name: simply and clearly. Logically, it should be a name, possibly a personal name, being a hapax (though I am not immediately swayed by random parallels like Semitic <i>*mlk</i> = 'king').<br />
<br />
But the true riddles just start here! Immedietaly after MA-RI-KE-JI, the text seem to end abruptly. However, the traces of a '1/2' numerical sign following the three clearly visible strokes warns us that the text is probably abraded, but the row is not empty. The faint traces on this part probably belong to two additional syllabary characters, that start the word readable in the next line. The abraded pieces of lines are themselves perfectly compatible with the reading <b>KU-DO-NI</b>. The rest of the phrase reads <b>DA-MA</b>. This is not a compound word: the word-separator dot is small, but clearly visible after KU-DO-NI (placed to the base of the sign, as on side A). While <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/05/what-do-minoan-linear-tablets-tell-us.html">KU-DO-NI</a> is clearly a place-name (= Lin B KU-DO-NI-JA, modern <i>Khania</i>), the meaning of DA-MA is less clear: nevertheless, it does resemble the stem of Linear A words DA-ME [HT86, HT95, HT120] and DA-MA-TE [libation vessel KY Za2]. The following word is equally tricky to read: it consists of merely two signs (the traces before it belong to an 'L2' fraction sign (number), possibly 2/15), but the first one is damaged. Following the traces on the abraded surface, a 'TE' sign would be the most reasonable reconstruction. This yields a name <b>TE-KI</b>, which is - again - a toponym (perhaps denoting the ancient Greek town of <i>Tegea</i> on western Crete, near Khania). The text continues with further putative tomponyms, such as <b>SA-MA</b> [HT10, HT52] and <b>PA3-NI-NA</b> (as on HT93, an adjectival form of PA3-NI [HT85, HT102]). The last two lines also show traces of erasures: the 'MA' sign of SA-MA was erased, and then re-written, similarly, before the PA3 of PA3-NI-NA, there are traces of an erased sign, probably KU, but it was later completely overwritten with numbers belonging to SA-MA.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cols="2" style="border: 2px ridge green;"><tbody>
<tr><th colspan="2" style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle;">Tablet HT85</th></tr>
<tr><th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 75%;"> Statement </th><th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 25%;"> Quantity </th></tr>
<tr><td align="center">A-DU • *307+*307 (women?) • <br />
VIR (people) • DA-RI-DA</td><td align="center"> <br />
12</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">PA3-NI</td><td align="center">12</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">U-DWE-ZA</td><td align="center">6</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">DA-SI-ZI</td><td align="center">24</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">KU-DO-NI</td><td align="center">5</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">TE-KE</td><td align="center">3</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">DA-RE</td><td align="center">4</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">KU-RO</td><td align="center">66</td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="3"><hr style="color: darkgreen; width: 100%;" /></td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">KI (=KI-RO?) • KI-RA-JA •<br />
KI-RE-TA2</td><td align="center"> <br />
1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">QE-KA</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">PA (=PA-I-TO?)</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">TE-TU</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">KA (=KA-NU-TI?)</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">DI (=DI-NA-U?)</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">ME-ZA</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">RE-DI-SE</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">WA-DU-NI-MI</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">MA-DI</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr><td align="center">QA-*310-I</td><td align="center">1</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<br />
To verify our corrected list, we should turn to other - much better preserved - toponym lists. The best counterpart could be <b>HT85</b> (see the table above). Not only many of the terms seen on the second part of HT6 recur here, but their relative order and grouping is also similar. Here, <b>KU-DO-NI</b> is directly followed by <b>TE-KE</b> (=TE-KI), just like on HT6. These two terms also directly stand next to each other on <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/05/what-do-minoan-linear-tablets-tell-us.html">HT13</a> - the tight association of the two places could be very elegantly explained by the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/06/new-map-of-middle-minoan-crete.html">geographic proximity</a> of <i>Khania</i> (<i>Kydonia</i>) and <i>Kissamos</i> (<i>Tegea</i>). But this is not the only pair repeated here. Though a much more obscure term, <b>WA-DU-NI-MI</b> is also paired with <b>RE-DI-SE</b> (=RA-TI-SE?). While I have no idea of the identity of the former, the latter name could easily be a declined form of <b>RA-DU</b> [HT58, probably also on the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/05/what-do-minoan-linear-tablets-tell-us_17.html">toponym list HT122</a>], the name for ancient <i>Lato</i> (Lin. B RA-TO), near modern <i>Aghios Nikolaos</i>. RA-TI-SE and RE-DI-SE could both be slightly erroneously written versions of *RA-DI-SE then (c.f. QA-RA2-WA [HT86] which is undoubtedly equal to QE-RA2-U [HT95] as the rest of the two lists are the same). Note that HT 85 also contains plenty of abbreviations. While the sole <b>KI</b> sign on the header of side B is probably an abbrevation for <b>KI-RO</b> (=missing), other single syllables likely stand for well-known places: <b>PA</b> = <b>PA-I-TO</b> (<i>Phaistos</i>), <b>KA</b> = <b>KA-NU-TI</b> (<i>?</i>) and <b>DI</b> = <b>DI-NA-U</b> (<i>?</i>). All these three re-occur on HT97, where two of the three are written out in full (save DI, which is probably DI-NA-U [as on the toponym list HT9]). This slacky habit of Minoan scribes to abbreviate commonly used names is unique to Linear A; Mycenaean Greek scribes using Linear B had more strict rules and names were never abbreviated to a single syllable.<br />
<br />
Lists counting persons are just as common in Linear A as in B, but they attempt to be as compact as possible. The scribes were often so absorbed in this goal, that they also sacrificed clarity for shortness, leaving behind considerable ambiguity. In some cases, the context can still help to solve these issues: for example, what could a sign 'NI'(*30) mean? First, and foremost, it can designate a type of goods, namely 'figs'; but it can also abbreviate transaction terms and even names. Because of the context, we can almost be certain that it meant the fruits on tablets like HT6, but it is an abbreviated transaction term on HT88 and HT99 (in contrary to the opinion of J. Younger, these tablets almost certainly count people as shown by the consistently integer values and have nothing to do with figs).<br />
<br />
But it is not just the wear of centuries that can cause troubles at reading. The slack of certain scribes is definitely a contributory factor. The tablet <b>HT29</b> shall be a good example of this. This small clay piece if full of erasures, hastily-written, malformed signs in irregular lines. As the scribe tried to salvage a tablet by erasing its previous contents, he sometimes unconsciously re-used earlier, half-visible strokes. The result is a complex maze of lines, parts of half-erased and rewritten signs. There is no surprise why all scholars had problems when attempting to read this document. But we shall see soon, that some names written on this tablet are fortunately not unique and thereby reconstructible by comparing the sign-groups with those on other, better-looking documents.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-AukezkQn-3E/Trr-5rWx2OI/AAAAAAAAAqY/W-AqWeIsshU/s1600/HT29-riddle.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left:1em; margin-right:1em"><img border="0" height="320" width="222" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-AukezkQn-3E/Trr-5rWx2OI/AAAAAAAAAqY/W-AqWeIsshU/s320/HT29-riddle.png" /></a></div><br />
<br />
When attempting a reading, we already run into difficulties right at the first line. Although the term <b>RU-MA-TA</b> can be read with some effort (this name is also seen on HT99), the upper right corner of the tablet is broken off, preventing us to identify any logogram describing the goods assessed. But the strictly integer numbers themselves already suggest that it may count people; the suspect is just reinforced when finding traces of an earlier, erased VIR sign just at the initial position. So we may relatively safely assume that the numbers refer to people (just as Schoep has suggested) - and as we shall see soon - many of the names (entries) are probably places.<br />
<br />
While the fourth term on this list can be easily identified as <b>PA-JA-RE</b> (also found on HT8 and HT88) despite its last sign being missing, the second and third names are a real headache. As they are apparently hapaxes and both miss some signs (on the broken-off segment), they cannot be restored with any level of certainty. And we are also plagued by the fact that some of the visible signs are in fact re-used fragments of erased ones, frequently making them nearly unidentifiable. One of the possible readings of the second line is <b>?-DA?-QI?</b>, with the 'DA' sign seemingly being a salvaged upper part of an erased *310 one. The last sign here is so malfomed we cannot be certain of its reading, either. I only put 'A' as the hypothetic missing initial syllable, because a word exists on the Khania tablets (KH92: A-DA-QI-RI) that faintly resembles this garbled one. <br />
<br />
The third name is much better legible, but it still has at least one initial syllable missing (as judged from the size of the broken fragment). Fortunately, the erasures that make our life hard, now also offer some help. In most cases of tablets with visible erasures (as on HT86), the erased text contains the same or almost the same entries as the latter one. HT29 is no different in this regard. Actually, behind the syllabograms 'DI', 'JA' and 'I', we can regognize earlier traces of the same, hinting that this name was erased, but then the scribe re-wrote it to almost exactly the same spot. Careful examination also reveals that an additional sign was originally also written in this line, right before the other three: judged by its shape, it was possibly JE, so we may use this information to reconstruct this term as <b>JE?-DI-JA-I</b> (still a hapax, and hard to interpret).<br />
<br />
From the fouth line, we have an easier job. Not that the signs were written with more clarity: The fourth word reads as either SA-?-RE or SA-?-SI at the first sight. The middle sign was interpreted as a somewhat misshapen *323 logogram by Godart and Olivier. But at a closer look, it rather resembles a hastily-written 'MA' sign (the 'cat head'), to which the sloppy scribe simply forgot to add the ears and eyes. This means that the word recorded here was probably <b>SA-MA-RE</b>, a declined version of the putative place-name SA-MA [HT10, HT52, also SA-MA-TI on HT39]. Again, the erasures reinforce our reading: traces of earlier, erased 'MA' and 'RE' signs are discernible somewhat right from the actual term (this also helps to make clear that the last sign was indeed 'RE', and not 'SI'.)<br />
<br />
Immediately thereafter we can see another suspicious term. This was read as ?-KI-TA by J. Younger. Godart and Olivier even labelled the misshapen initial syllabogram with a novel identifier as *340. But this one really looks like the upper half of a well-known *306 sign - of which the lower half was accidentally erased by the scribe, when plowing over the next line to be obliterated. If so, the reading was originally intended to be *306-KI-TA or <b>WO-KI-TA</b> - perhaps unsurprisingly - <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/06/place-names-on-cretan-sealstones-key-to.html">another place-name</a>. This time again, the traces of all 'WO', 'KI' and 'TA' are also visble under the erasure, shifted rightwards with two positions (partly under the next word).<br />
<br />
The last two words appear to be hapaxes, and - as a consequence - difficult to ascertain. The logic of erasures - both <b>A-RE-DA?-I</b> and <b>QA?-DU-MA-NE</b> were re-written while shifting leftwards - still helps a bit. Since there is a nicely visible erased 'RE', and there was clearly an 'I' sign behind the 'DU', it is probable that the sign at the beginning of line 5 is a superimposed image of an earlier 'DA' (that the scribe failed to erase) and another one with a rounded top, possibly 'QA'. Note that originally there was another term after WO-KI-TA (the 'SI' is still visble under the 'RE' of A-RE-DA?-I), but it was later completely removed from the list after a revision. This way, most of the erased remnants of QA?-DU-MA-NE were not overwritten (the earlier 'MA' and the 'NE' can still be found with some effort).<br />
<br />
Thus we have seen, that it is possible to read at least some of the names on this garbled tablet. But to decipher the true meaning behind these names, it is obligatory to look at the Zakros tablets. Interestingly, both SA-MA and PA-JA-RE recur on the the same list (ZA10), that lists donors of cheap wine (VINb). RU-MA-TA is also seen in the form RU-MA-TA-SE (declined variant, genitive?) on ZA20. The wide variety of goods per name, their consistent grouping and the considerable geographic distances between archives taken into account, these names are less likely to be persons (unless they are extremely common personal names, unlike even Linear B Greek ones), and much-much more likely to be places. This appears to be a striking difference between Linear A and B: Mycenaeans were more "individualistic", in the sense that their accounting also recorded the names of persons, while it mostly sufficed for Minoans to only state the place of origin or destination when speaking about groups of persons, taxes, gifts, supplies, or other types of deliveries.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-40754127853831628222011-08-14T13:00:00.000-07:002011-08-14T13:19:41.876-07:00Potential 'MO', 'JO' and 'WE' signs in Linear A - lessons learned from the latest Minoan clay tabletsInstead of making any more wild theories about the meaning of certain Minoan phrases, I decided to turn back to the basics once again. After all, how can we understand words written in Linear A, if we cannot even be certain about their reading? The existence of many signs without any phonetic value assigned is especially annoying. The situation is definitely worse than in Linear B, partly because some Linear B signs do not even have a Linear A counterpart (ancestor) identified. Now, how can we reconcile this? It is very likely that at least some "asterisked numbers" <i>do</i> correspond to already-deciphered Linear B syllabograms. So, what I am going to present in the next series of posts is a new attempt to identify the phonetic values of the more common, yet-unreadable Linear A signs.<br />
<br />
To achieve this goal, we have to browse through all the original tablets, over and over again, to find clues. The positional distribution of the signs in question (initial, medial or terminal) and the phonetic values of neighbouring signs offer a good deal of information. But this has to be evaluated within the bounds of the Minoan language, since we know it was radically different from Mycaenean Greek. Comparisons with Linear B sign-distributions do not help much, that was also noted by Packard. The graphic appearence and variation classes of syllabograms - on the other hand - <i>do</i> give us a chance to meaningfully compare Linear A signs with either Hieroglyphic or Linear B ones. The last one especially comes handy, since we may get a good phonetic value if we can find the correct assignment. <br />
<br />
Fortunately, there are some spectacular Linear A documents that help us in our quest more than a thousand other tablets. In this post, I will be focusing upon the clay tablet <b>KH11</b>. Although it may appear as an oddball of a specimen at first, we shall see soon that these features are explainable with the tablet being in some sense "transitional" towards Linear B: both in style and in context!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-T9CadmGDOL4/Tkfg-5pjX0I/AAAAAAAAAl8/e8H27RTmX-Y/s1600/KH11-tablet-new-reading.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="231" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-T9CadmGDOL4/Tkfg-5pjX0I/AAAAAAAAAl8/e8H27RTmX-Y/s320/KH11-tablet-new-reading.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
You can see the facsimile of KH11 and the suggested reading of its entries on figure #1. Note that I have been playing with the values of fractional signs a lot, slightly altering some of the traditionally assigned numbers. Although nothing is set in stone yet, this is something that I plan to make a separate post later on. I will not mention the details here: everything comes at its own time.<br />
<br />
The first entry of KH11 starts with the word <b>A-DU-RE-ZA</b>. It has two possible interpretations: first of all, it could be a pair of separate words: A-DU RE-ZA (transaction term + toponym). But it is more probable that the table refers to persons instead of places (due to the small quantity of goods mentioned). This could also happen if A-DU-RE-ZA (as a single word) was a personal name or title somehow derived from <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/06/new-map-of-middle-minoan-crete.html">DU-RE-ZA</a> (mentioned on KH20, also recurring on ZA10 and ZA20 in the form DU-RE-ZA-SE), another place-name. On KH11, every donor (person?) delivers an array of different goods, often with small, fractional quantities. The most important of them was marked with the logogram <b>*303</b>. Based on the context of other tablets (e.g. KH6, KH7) and the shape of the sign, it must have been an important foodstuff for humans and animals alike, most likely a type of grain: <i>barley</i>. Two common variants exist in Linear A: the bare *303 sign - that I labelled <b>HOR</b> (Latin <i>hordeum</i> = barley) - and "fractionalized" variants, for example <b>HOR+1/4</b>. The meaning of the latter is unclear, though the GRA sign (grain: likely wheat) also somes with similar fractional ligatures. Another type of goods was labelled with <b>*306</b>. This sign is mostly phonetical in Linear A, with the possible value WO (same as Lin B WO). But on the KH tablets, it also denotes a type of agricultural goods. It comes in integer quantities only, and *306 looks like an animal head, so I assigned it the reading <i>donkey</i>, <b>ASI</b> (Latin <i>asinus</i> = donkey). Other tablets from Khania (e.g KH 6) also list animals with portions of barely - usually, it cannot be decided whether the barely was a low-quality one, used as fodder, or intended for human consumption.<br />
<br />
Although the sign Lin A *303 is slightly dissimilar in shape to the Linear B sign denoting barley, it still very closely resembles a purely phonetic sign: Linear B <b>MO</b>. Immediately in the second line of KH11, we also see a series of two *303 signs next to each other. This is almost impossible to explain as pure logograms. Godart & Olivier noted that one of these signs contains a tiny extra stroke, so they designated it as a new sign, *348. Nevertheless, its graphic image does not support the distinction. Also, why would one repeat the same type of goods from one donor three times over? It is way more sensible therefore, to read these *303 signs not as HOR, but with a phonetic value: MO. This yields a new name in the second line: <b>MO-RO-MO</b> (the middle sign should be RO instead of fraction B). This is the first time we see a genuine MO (= Lin B *15) in Linear A. <br />
<br />
And the tablet just keeps giving surprises. In the third line, we can read another name, transliterated by J. Younger as <b>A-TO-*349-TO-I</b>.The penultimate sign is damaged, so we cannot meaningfully decide whether it was indeed TO or NA instead. But the one identified as *349 looks fairly similar to the Linear B <b>JO</b> sign: especially with its "wavy" shaft. It is generally dissimilar to anything other in Linear A, except perhaps the very peculiar TO sign on the vessel <a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9GcnvSu91T4/ThhGftwJRzI/AAAAAAAAAlg/GGbdt3aFwnA/s1600/Two-libation-vessels-amended.png">KN10</a> (that could also be a JO, by the way). So now we have another name with a lot of 'o' sounds in it, probably A-TO-JO-TO-I. Serious caution is adviced, though, before defining a new sign-class from a single occurrance. The Linear B JO sign is also possible to derive - by simplification - from other signs, most prominently Lin A *310. At the same time, *349 could also be a regular *301 sign, to which the scribe simply forgot to add a vertical stroke. This would support a reading A-TO-WE-TO-I instead (very putatively: <i>*Αρτοϝενθοι</i> from Ancient Greek <i>αρτος</i>, <i>bread</i> - see the discussion later). <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GaU9iQz-snE/TkZWgMywwXI/AAAAAAAAAlw/TyxZQcrT-i8/s1600/TYZb4-vessel-reading.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="207" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GaU9iQz-snE/TkZWgMywwXI/AAAAAAAAAlw/TyxZQcrT-i8/s320/TYZb4-vessel-reading.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
The last full word on the tablet is equally interesting: It starts with an A, surely enough. The second sign is a hastely written SU (and probably not TA). The third sign - for some inexplicable reasons - was given a unique identifier (*350) by Godart: I am not sure why, because it looks like a good-enough PU sign for me. The last syllabogram of this word is the well-known *301 - in its "wavy" variant. It does not only look like Linear B WE, but also gives a meaningful reading this way: the word is thus A-SU-PU-WE - known from other Linear A tablets in different forms (A-SU-PU-WA on <a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NkMN3K1wnAc/TgYvmnfqudI/AAAAAAAAAlE/KN2BoLHRPXU/s1600/Linear-A-tablet-ARKH2.png">ARKH2</a> and A-SI-SU-PO-A on KH9). Judged by the context (no logogram follows it), it is probably a transaction term - I have no better idea. <br />
<br />
The conclusion that *301 can in fact be read as WE also receives a nice reinforcement from another source: The inscribed vessel TY Zb4 shows a correcture *306 → *301. Although it was probably incorrect (the form *306-KI-TA or WO-KI-TA is known from <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/06/place-names-on-cretan-sealstones-key-to.html">other sources</a>), the error was not particularly big if *301 was indeed WE. This also means that we can now finally read the first words of the libation formulae in full. Although A-TA-I-WE-WA-JA or TA-NA-I-WE-U-TI-NU are a bit unexpected due to the high frequency of semivowels, we have no real reason to dismiss this reading. It is also possible that one or more additional consonants were ommitted here. Just remember that clusters like <i>*-rw-</i> also get simplified to <i>*-w-</i> in Linear B (c.f. KO-WO from <i>*korwos</i> = boy). If one observes carefully, the shape of Lin A *301 also shows a clear evolution. The earlier (Middle Minoan) verson is still similar to its Hieroglyphic ancestor (the "adze"-figure), while the Late Minoan versions are gradually becoming more-and-more similar to a "dollar" character. They are also frequently mirrored all the time. Finally, the central shaft is ommitted, and we have the snake-like Linear B *75 = WE sign!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NDNbKYrMIx4/TkfdKITrDhI/AAAAAAAAAl4/pY1wHuaZmKk/s1600/Cretan-WE-sign-evolution.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="203" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NDNbKYrMIx4/TkfdKITrDhI/AAAAAAAAAl4/pY1wHuaZmKk/s320/Cretan-WE-sign-evolution.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
But how can we interpret all these unusual names on KH11? Their most prominent feature - the one that triggered the use of "rare signs" - is the high frequency of 'o' vowels. This is uncommon in Minoan contexts, but it is perfectly what we would expect if their bearers were <i>Mycaenean Greeks</i>. Indeed, this tablet (as all the Khania tablets) comes from the end of the Late Minoan Ib period (approx. 1425 BC). This was a time of great turmoil, war and destruction on Crete: many of the cities were burnt to the ground, never to be re-settled again. And even in those that remained inhabited, the subsequent appearence of Linear B inscriptions (in early Greek) points to a shift of power - to a centralized Mycaenean administration controlled by a Greek-speaking aristocracy. While the destruction on the eastern end of the island was severe at the end of LMIb, the transition was probably less violent in the west (note that Khania as well as other settlements remained inhabited without a major break). And it is perfectly possible that some Greek individuals were already present on the island in the LMI era, well before a major wave of continental Greeks reached and settled on Crete in the LMII period. Linear B itself is more-or-less a straight continuation of the (150 years earlier) late Linear A script, without any major changes to the phonetic values, ortography, or the shapes of the signs. This gives hope that - one nice day - the phonetic values behind even the most mysterious Linear A signs <i>will</i> be deciphered.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-76145003732244999972011-07-16T04:00:00.000-07:002011-08-13T04:03:42.696-07:00"My Lady Rhea"It happens every day. A celebrated scientist discovers something, makes up a daring theory and finds initial proof. Then the theory begins to spread to all corners of the world. More and more scientists support it. Younger generations may take it as an axiom. Everyone is happy; and then it is suddenly disproven. In my area of expertise: molecular biology, I have seen countless theories born, flourish and finally crumble to dust, even in our lab. And no one is immune to such fallacies. In fact, I would be overjoyed to get 1/10 of my experiments to actually see publication. Similarly, I would be very happy if I knew that just 10% of the things I stated in this blog would stand the test of time. But without preconceptions, no research can be truely successful; and they say no pain, no gain. So here am I again to share some bits of my research with you. <br />
<br />
Eteocretan language is a difficult subject to study. Partly because there are very few inscriptions known, most of them are fragmentary, and both the vocabulary and grammar are quite exotic. The hardships of understanding even bits of it even prompted some scholars to reject any connections between Minoan (i.e. the language underlying Linear A) and Eteocretan. This was an utterly unwise idea: after all, where could Eteocretan stem from if not from the earlier, Pre-Greek inhabitants of the Aegean? And indeed, I keep stumbling upon more purely Minoan phrases in Eteocretan inscriptions, the more I look. The very provocative title I gave to this post is none other than the preliminary translation of the Eteocretan phrase <b>TUPRMĒRIĒIA</b>. I shall show in my current post that each and every part of the phrase <i>Tupṛ mē-Riēya</i> is of Minoan stock, and - what is more - clearly attested in Bronze-age Cretan scripts!<br />
<br />
There are less than a dozen Eteocretan inscriptions, and none of them are complete. All of them come from the eastern half of Crete, from Dreros and Praisos. It is likely that Eteocretan was already a language in decline by the time these texts were composed, as many are bilingual in Greek. But the Greek halves of the Drerian inscriptions are actually a great help to understand (at least roughly) the meaning of these texts, even the Eteocretan parts. Although I am referring to these texts as being bilingual, this does not imply that the two halves are always word-by-word translations.<br />
<br />
My attention was drawn to one of the <a href="http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Eteocretan/Dreros2.html">Drerian inscriptions</a> (#2). These texts are all written in an archaic Greek alphabet, and thus easily legible. Unfortunately, this small piece of stone is weathered and the letters are heavily damaged. Only one line of the Eteocretan text survived: this ends with the phrase TUPRMĒRIĒIA. We know that this is a complete Eteocretan word, because the inscription <i>does</i> contain word-dividers. Dreros #2 is actually a bilingual inscription, the lower half being composed in Doric Greek. The Greek part is also damaged, but still largely legible; according to van Effenterre, it is a religious oath. The Greek formula does not contain the name of any deity; yet that might be present in the Eteocretan text, since they are not necessarily strict translations of each other (the Eteocretan one looks much shorter). After doing some research and extensive comparisons with Minoan finds, I came to the conclusion that the word TUPRMĒRIĒIA might be this missing invocation.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q7qOERV4ym4/Th6ROieZMdI/AAAAAAAAAlk/1kvrI32EqmU/s1600/Dreros-inscription-02.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q7qOERV4ym4/Th6ROieZMdI/AAAAAAAAAlk/1kvrI32EqmU/s320/Dreros-inscription-02.png" width="275" /></a></div><br />
Let us consider the first half of this phrase. We may separate the part <b><i>Tupṛ</i></b> - as we know from other examples, that Eteocretan allowed syllabic sonorants. The reason to do so is that there exists a similar word in Minoan libation formulae, traditionally transliterated as <b>DU-PU2-RE</b>. There are many ambiguities with its reading: the precise value of the Minoan D-series is disputed (<i>*d? *t? *th? *dh?</i>), and we know that RE can stand for both <i>*-re</i> and <i>*-le</i>. But we also know that PU2 certainly had a special value, as it stands for <i>*phu</i> or <i>*bu</i> in Linear B, but never for a simple <i>*pu</i>. It is also possible, that the sound it used to mark was partially voiced in Minoan as well, explaining its use in the word reconstructed as <i>*duphre</i>. <br />
<br />
In his fundamental article about the Minoan language, the Portuguese scholar Miguel Valério made a <a href="http://unl-pt.academia.edu/MiguelVal%C3%A9rio/Papers/149198/Diktaian_Master_A_Minoan_Predecessor_of_Diktaian_Zeus_in_Linear_A">crucial discovery</a> about the phrase <b>DU-PU2-RE</b>. Several Anatolian languages used similar words: <i>*tapar(riya)-</i> meant 'to rule' in Luwian and <i>taparnas</i> (or <i>dabarnas</i>) was the title of Hittite kings. The latter also comes in a variant <i>laparnas</i> (<i>labarnas</i>): both the stem and its mutations are similar to the one observed in Greek <i>λαβύρινθος</i> (vs. Mycaenean DA-PU2-RI-TO-JO • PO-TI-NI-JA, referring to a sanctuary near Knossos). Since the <i>Labyrinth</i> is consistently associated with Crete, we may safely assume that this word entered the Mycaenean language as a loan-word form Minoan. Thus it is not just possible, but outright expected to see related stems in Minoan texts. Therefore Valério's explanation for the phrase DU-PU2-RE as a form closely related or identical to Anatolian <i>*tapar-</i> (or <i>*dabar-</i>) is likely correct. <br />
<br />
There is also an account of ancient Greek authors on the temple of <i>Zeus Labraundos</i> in Caria, citing that <b><i>λάβρυς</i></b> denoted "double-axe" in the local language. I do not know if there is any connection between <i>labrys</i> and the modern middle-eastern (Persian, Indian) term for battle-axe: <b><i>tabar</i></b>, but to compare a word for 'ruler' with 'axe' could be a conflation of similarly-sounding words from the side of the Greeks. Yet <a href="http://www.imk.msu.ru/Structure/Linguistics/yakubovich/download/labyrinth.pdf">this question</a> is currently far from being solved.<br />
<br />
Given the roots of DU-PU2-RE, Valério gave a translation 'lord', 'ruler' or 'master'. This raw translation may now be refined further. The phrase DU-PU2-RE is not an independent word: it forms a part of compound phrases like JA-DI-KI-TE-TE-DU-PU2-RE. In this word, the first half is a geographic term: <i>Mount Dikte</i>. But in Linear B, the term DI-KA-TA is used in a much more restricted sense: it refers to a particular sanctuary on Dikte (maybe near the cave of Psychro). So (J)A-DI-KI-TE-TE-DU-PU2-RE is more likely a religious title and not referring to a king. There is also clear evidence, that both A-DI-KI-TE-TE (e.g. there is the phrase A-DI-KI-TE-TE-?-KE-RE on PKZa11) and DU-PU2-RE (see PA-TA-DA-DU-PU2-RE on HTZb160, where PA-TA-DA is another place-name) can combine with other words. Hence there can be no doubt of their separate nature.<br />
<br />
We also know that Minoan probably had no grammatical genders. They even used the same base logogram for men and women: this would have been impossible in Mycaenean, and indeed, Linear B has separate signs for women and men. But if there was indeed no gender distinction in Minoan, then why not read DU-PU2-RE as <b>'lady'</b> or <b>'mistress'</b>? And it might not be a reference to just <i>any</i> lady, but to a goddess. Those who were hunting for divine names in the Libation Formula can now rejoice: after all, JA-DI-KI-TE-TE-DU-PU2-RE (<i>*i-Adiktete-Duphre</i>) may now be read as <b>'that of the Lady from the Dikte'</b>. If some titles (especially divine titles) were used in the same form for males and females alike, that could explain the confusion of Egyptian scribes, and why they referred to Minoan goddesses <i>*Amaya</i> and <i>*Raziya</i> as male gods in the <a href="http://www2.ulg.ac.be/archgrec/IMG/aegeum/aegaeum22%28pdf%29/56%20HAIDER.pdf">Keftiu-incantations</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tkZNY3js4_Y/Th6Ra0CjQXI/AAAAAAAAAlo/0PUr3bOTwms/s1600/Rhea.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="269" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tkZNY3js4_Y/Th6Ra0CjQXI/AAAAAAAAAlo/0PUr3bOTwms/s320/Rhea.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
In correspondence with the above concept, all inscriptions that contain the term JA-DI-KI-TE-TE-DU-PU2-RE also present a chain of hapax legomena (names?) right afterwards it. This helps to explain the uncomfortable situation that the "<i>Mistress of the Dikte</i>" stands on a place in these formulae, which is normally occupied by toponyms (clearly donors and not recipients). But I still have to concede it to Glen Gordon, that these expressions only work if we allowed the <i>recipient</i> to take an <i>*-e</i> ending, normally expected for a <i>donor</i> in the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/04/bold-new-theory-on-minoan-grammar.html">original theory</a>. Thus the expression A-PA-RA-NE • QA-ZI-RA-RE [HT96] probably has <i>*Aplan</i> as a recipient (but literally, it is: "<i>of</i> Aplan, from the chieftaindom"): only this proposition would allow <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/05/divine-names-on-linear-tablets.html">to identify</a> that name with the Greek theonym <i>Ἀπόλλων</i> (or Roman <i>Apollo</i>).<br />
<br />
Staying by divine names, this is where the Phaistos Disc comes into sight. We cannot make out much yet of its very unique-styled Minoan inscription. But one thing seems probable: certain words that are marked with an additional wedge, seem to be names. One of such terms reads as RA2-*07 (the sign Pha *07 cannot be read with any certainty). It also returns in the form MA-RA2-*07, where *MA- seems to be a prefix element (it is seen on other words <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/06/exploring-patterns-on-infamous-phaistos.html">on the Disc</a> and - albeit very rarely - <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/06/place-names-on-cretan-sealstones-key-to.html">in Hieroglyphics</a>). This prefixed form is actually very similar to the second half of TUPRMĒRIĒIA: which is probably <b><i>*mē-Riēya</i></b>. The correspondence of Eteocretan <i>*ē</i> to Minoan <i>*ā</i> could be pretty regular, if its vowels developed similarly to early Greek ones. The core stem (<i>Rya-*07</i> on the Disc and <i>Rieya</i> here) also displays a high similarity with the classic Greek theonym <b>Rhea</b>. Two things are worth noting: first of all, the Cretan forms have a consistent <i>*ry-</i> cluster in their stem, what the Greek version lacks. Second, we cannot make out the value of that missing Pha *07 sign that easily, as the contemporary Egyptian rendering of this name: <i>R-ṯ3-jj</i> (perhaps <i>*Ratsiya</i>) warns us of a potential stop consonant in the original stem. This was probably lenitioned out and lost in later stages of the Minoan language, but might still be seen on Middle Minoan relics. I am not going into irresponsible guessings here, but the value of Pha *07 could be either 'TA', 'TI' or even 'SI'. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/04/on-quest-to-find-minoan-pronouns.html">Prefixes</a> are frequently seen in Linear A and seem to be an intergral part of the Minoan language. These might also be clitics or simply, irregularly-written short particles. Nevertheless, they are often difficult to interpret. Because prefixes combine freely with suffixes (e.g. locative, elative or ablative cases), any theory that seeks to explain these as a marker of just another regular case (say, dative) runs into a serious trouble. Based on extant languages that use both prefixes and suffixes at the same time on nouns (e.g. the Mesoamerican Nahuatl language, or certain Caucasian languages), a separation of roles is expected: if suffixes express directionalty and location, it is probable that prefixes would instead be <i>pronominal</i> in nature. <br />
<br />
This is also what the study of potentially related languages hints at. While Minoan Linear A shows prefixes <i>*i-</i> (that looks like a generic deictic / connector) and <i>*a-</i> (that seems to refer to persons only), Etruscan has third person pronouns in the forms <i>in</i> (inanimate version, 'it') and <i>an</i> (animate version,'he'/'she'). Even so, the reading of rare prefixes, like <i>*ma-</i> remains uncertain. But if <i>all</i> prefix-like elements are indeed pronouns (which is a <i>big</i> assumption), then <i>*ma-</i> could plausibly be a first person possessive pronoun ('my') in an enclitic form. Note that <i>verbs</i> take personal markings as <i>suffixes</i> (e.g. KA-NI-JA-MI [CRZf1] or KA-NI-JA-SI [PKZa12] - both verbal forms of KA-NA [HT23], 'gift'), not as prefixes. As with all novel decipherment attempts, the reading of <i>Tupṛ mē-Riēya</i> remains unconfirmed: we still need more insight, especially into the nature of prefix elements before we can either confirm or reject this explanation.<br />
<br />
<u>Update:</u><br />
I realized that I was not paying enough attention to a particular detail. Even if we posit a form <i>*dabrwintha</i> as ancestral to <i>λαβύρινθος</i>, we still have to count with two different, but related Cretan stems: <i>*daphr-</i> and <i>*duphr-</i>. While this was not impossible in Minoan (e.g. <i>*qazil</i> vs. <i>*qizil</i>), it adds an unnecessary level of complexity to the problem. By the same virtue, we may also suppose that these two stems were unrelated to each other. Note that other explanations also exist for <i>*duphr-</i>: for example, Glen Gordon has equated the Eteocretan <i>tupr</i> with the Etruscan word <i>θuφ</i> - which he proposed to read as "oath". Although I cannot say that the meaning of <i>θuφ</i> is certain to any extent, it is still insteresting to observe that <i>θuφ</i> also - very characteristically - stands as an epithet to the sky-god <b>Tinia</b> in one of his many roles (<i>"Tin θuf"</i>). Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-37685282020555881002011-07-05T14:00:00.000-07:002011-07-09T05:25:16.734-07:00Those "bloody" Minoans...For my next post, we are going to discuss yet another popular topic: the forms and possible meaning of word <b>A-SA-SA-RA-ME</b>. It is also time for me to get my hand dirty, since I have never seen so many ill-fitting translations of Minoan phrases that was given for this poor little word. Now is the time to try and find better explanation(s).<br />
<br />
Up to date most (all?) theories aspire to read (J)A-SA-SA-RA-ME as some sort of divine name. Apart from some (phonologically and semantically) really implausible explanations, there are two main problems with this theory. First of all, the term (J)A-SA-SA-RA-ME is very common: found on almost all <a href="http://people.ku.edu/%7Ejyounger/LinearA/religioustexts.html">objects of ritual context:</a> on libation tables, on sacrificial vessels, on a statue and even on a silver pin, a total of at least 16 times. A little bit <i>too common</i>, if you ask me. Given the highly polytheistic nature of almost all bronze-age religions (as also evidenced by <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/05/divine-names-on-linear-tablets.html">both Linear A and B tablets</a>), this is <i>not</i> what we would expect if it were a theonym. The only religious term in Linear B that could match this high frequency would be PO-TI-NI-JA. This is, however, <i>not</i> a proper name, but a title ('lady', 'mistress') appended to the <a href="http://projectsx.dartmouth.edu/classics/history/bronze_age/lessons/les/26.html">names</a> of most if not all the goddesses invoked.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EBbmMeKy7BA/ThDOeG2Vd6I/AAAAAAAAAlQ/_tvnIAxa6Lg/s1600/Minoan-libation.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EBbmMeKy7BA/ThDOeG2Vd6I/AAAAAAAAAlQ/_tvnIAxa6Lg/s320/Minoan-libation.png" width="311" /></a></div><br />
The other problem is the baffling word-formation observed on the stone vessel <a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9GcnvSu91T4/ThhGftwJRzI/AAAAAAAAAlg/GGbdt3aFwnA/s1600/Two-libation-vessels-amended.png">KNZa10</a>, where a derived case: JA-SA-SA-RA-MA-NA can be read. The <i>*-na</i> ending seen here is suspiciously similar to the one seen on words expressing ethnic origin (<i>Phraisona</i> = 'from <i>Praisos</i>' in Eteocretan or <i>PA3-NI-NA</i> = 'from <i>PA3-NI</i>' in Linear A) and on innumerable <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/08/pre-greek-place-names-of-aegean.html">Pre-Greek place-names</a> (mostly hellenized to <i>*-nos</i>). This could be explained as a 'pertinentive adjective', also found (in the same form) in other Aegean languages, such as Etruscan. Such a derived form is <i>not</i> what we would expect if (J)A-SA-SA-RA-ME were a proper name. After all, the Greek priests would have given offerings <i>to Zeus</i> (or perhaps even <i>of Zeus</i>), but probably not <i>Zeusian</i> offerings. But it does not exclude a reading as a more generic term (even as an epithet). I am yet to see examples of a language that prefers to cite the very <i>names</i> of divinites in an adjectival form when speaking about sacrifices. If you have any good examples, I would appreciate if you could share them with me.<br />
<br />
To this end, I looked up the word <b>isḫassaras</b> in the Etymological Dictionary of the Hittite Inherited Lexicon (here is <a href="http://www.google.hu/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCUQFjAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.leidenuniv.nl%2Fbitstream%2Fhandle%2F1887%2F11996%2F02.pdf%3Bjsessionid%3DBA67FBB54BC1E14BFD80456998446511%3Fsequence%3D5&rct=j&q=Etymological%20Dictionary%20of%20the%20Hittite%20Inherited%20Lexicon&ei=5PIRTq-aOMzCswaIze35Dg&usg=AFQjCNF_y_uYmzczw2gGi4kzAVXw8gZAuQ&sig2=TXu0GT0Kg6fpeR0qpuI2ag&cad=rja">a link</a> for the online pdf version). This is the so-far best match in any other language, based on its form and meaning - if we stick with the original 'theonymy' theory. <i>Isḫassara-</i> is a compound stem, made up from <i>isḫa-</i> = 'lord' and the feminizing suffix <i>-sara-</i>, thus meaning 'lady'. None of its parts have a particularly good Indo-European etymology. But to derive A-SA-SA-RA-ME from this word, we have to conjecture a formative (<i>*-ma</i>). Does <i>isḫassara-</i> admit further derivations in Hittite? Much to my surprise, it does: we even have an adjective <i>isḫassarwant-</i> = 'lordly'. This could also potentially make our first theory work: after all, the sacrifices offered on the stone altars could have been 'lordly', 'noble' or 'divine' in a sense of either the donor (official), the circumstance (feast) or the recipient (divinity). To get this, we have to conjecture a chain of derivative suffixes on the stem of JA-SA-SA-RA-MA-NA (<i>*-m(a)-na</i>), not mentioning the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/02/i-particle-of-minoan-language.html">pronominal prefix element <i>*i-</i></a> my readers are likely already familiar with.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YX3QHYAGbZ8/ThhGV4XqomI/AAAAAAAAAlc/lMC5Xmp5TyU/s1600/Outdoor-altars.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="283" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YX3QHYAGbZ8/ThhGV4XqomI/AAAAAAAAAlc/lMC5Xmp5TyU/s320/Outdoor-altars.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
The fact that a Minoan word can admit multiple formatives in a long chain is not an isolated phenomenon. Let us consider the word-formation in I-PI-NA-MI-NA-TE, a word seen on the sacrificial stone-vessel <a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--2Z9O8CKzSY/TewD0DYuucI/AAAAAAAAAkQ/Pfvgyd6cZ9c/s1600/Two-libation-vessels.png">APZa2</a>. This single word is enough to illustrate<br />
the polysynthetic tendency of the Minoan language. The base stem appears to be <i>*ip(i)</i>. Let's say (as a simple assumption - based on earlier <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/03/word-i-pi-na-ma-blood-or-honey.html">considerations</a>) that <i>*ip</i> meant 'blood'. Then <i>*ipna</i> would mean 'bloody' (adjective in <i>*-na</i>), <i>*ipnama</i> would be 'bloodletting' (<i>*-ma</i> ending: expressing action?), thus <i>*ipnaməna</i> 'bloodletting cup' (the same <i>*-na</i> formative again). and finally <i>*ipnamənate(n)</i> = 'from (this) bloodletting cup': a regular elative (suffix <i>*-(a)te(n)</i>). I wrote <i>*-te(n)</i> instead of just <i>*-te</i>, to connect this ending with the Classic Greek elative case in <i>-θεν</i> and the Hurrian ablative ending <i>*-tan</i>, as they could be related forms (due to a <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/09/elegant-explanation-for-lack-of-r-l.html">linguistic areal effect</a>). Also, to explain the <i>*-i-</i> (<i>*-ə-</i>?) vowel, we have to keep in mind that many of the Minoan suffixes appear to <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/01/intrusive-suffixes-of-minoan-language.html">intrude</a> into the stem they fit on, deleting or re-colouring (i.e. *a→*i) any stem-vowels they collide with. <br />
<br />
It is also possible that the <i>-i-</i> (<i>*-ə-</i>?) vowel was only inserted into the word I-PI-NA-MI-NA to make the <i>*-mn-</i> cluster easily pronounceable. In a number of cases, a (helper?) <i>-i-</i> vowel is seen, that has been deleted in others: the most famous example could be <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/04/gleaning-cretan-place-names-from-linear.html">KU-NI-SU</a> (= <i>Knossos</i>?): here, the methathesis is already seen in the Linear B version: KO-NO-SO (due to the spelling rules, this cannot be any other form, just <i>Knossos</i>). That is only possible if KU-NI-SU was also pronounced as <i>*Kunəsu</i> and even as <i>*Kunsu</i> in real life.<br />
<br />
Before discarding this (highly hypothetic) derivation, one should also look at some Hittite grammar-books for parallels: the Anatolian stem <i>esḫar-</i> (= 'blood') is derivatized in a comparable way : although the formatives themselves are different, the result is fairly similar. Thus <i>isḫarnumae-</i> actually means 'to make bloody'. In Luwian, the related word: <i>asḫarnummai-</i> may translate similarly: 'be covered in blood'.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9bR0n2iGBvw/ThDOl5paCzI/AAAAAAAAAlU/rsxLc4tPKPc/s1600/Minoan-animal-sacrifice.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="247" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9bR0n2iGBvw/ThDOl5paCzI/AAAAAAAAAlU/rsxLc4tPKPc/s320/Minoan-animal-sacrifice.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
And thus we have arrived to the point to discuss a second theory about the meaning of A-SA-SA-RA-ME. It will be more in-line with the contemporary Minoan customs, but probably less pleasing to a faint-hearted reader. This possible explanation would be to compare A-SA-SA-RA-ME with the hieroglyphic Luwian word <b>asḫarmis</b> (plural: <b>a-sa-ḫa+ra-mi-sa</b>) = 'offering', 'sacrifice' (or similar). Hittitologists tend to connect this word with Luwian <i>asḫar-</i> = 'blood', thus <i>*asḫar-m-is-</i> originally meaning 'bloody sacrifice'. Whatever its orginal etymology was, it was used in a bit more generic sense in the Karkamiš inscriptions, since at least one of its mentions (see the figure) also involves sacrifice of bread, not just animals. Given the number of phrases in Minoan with possible Anatolian cognates, we should not be surprised to see yet another one added to the list. While the gemination of SA syllables is definitely problematic in Minoan (we must assume a development <i>*-asḫa-</i> → <i>*-asaḫa-</i> → <i>*-asasa-</i> upon borrowing - as Minoan might not have had the consonant <i>ḫ</i>) and its stem-ending is different, a generic meaning 'sacrifice' would fit exceptionally well with *A-SA-SA-RA-M-. Should this identification be true, A-SA-SA-RA-ME could mean 'of sacrifice' and conversely A-SA-SA-RA-MA-NA 'sacrificial'. This could easily explain the universal use of these terms in religious contexts.<br />
<br />
The fact that Minoans practiced animal sacrifices regularly, is well-evidenced by archeological finds in and around many sanctuaries. The public altar found in the courtyard of <a href="http://www.uk.digiserve.com/mentor/minoan/gournia.htm">Gournia</a> could have served a smilar purpose as Ian Swindale has suggested (and it might be true to the site of <a href="http://www.uk.digiserve.com/mentor/minoan/malia.htm">Mallia</a> as well). The spectacular <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagia_Triada_sarcophagus">Haghia Triada sacrophagus</a> also depicts such a scene on one of its sides (see figure): Here, the priestess - dressed in a ceremonial robe and a crown with feathers - collects the blood of the sacrificed cow into a conical vessel, quite similar to the inscribed stone cup <a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9GcnvSu91T4/ThhGftwJRzI/AAAAAAAAAlg/GGbdt3aFwnA/s1600/Two-libation-vessels-amended.png">APZa2</a>. The blood is presumed as having been poured onto the altar-stone by the same three figures, as shown on the opposite side of the sacrophagus. The slaughter of animals was just a small part of religious feasts. The meat was likely roasted or cooked and was offered as a communal meal for all participants (gathered outside the temple - one thing the large squares in the Minoan city-centres were exceptionally good for). Ceremonies of this sort were commonplace in Classic Greece, where they lasted for multiple days, and encompassed processions, sacred chants and drama sessions (in theatre), sports competitions, etc. These festivities also appear to be very similar in core to the (pagan) Old English <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bl%C3%B3t">Blót</a>. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JiSJ-JmbmDY/ThDOx9mJr4I/AAAAAAAAAlY/OEEQCroVRcw/s1600/Luwian-sacrificial-formula.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JiSJ-JmbmDY/ThDOx9mJr4I/AAAAAAAAAlY/OEEQCroVRcw/s320/Luwian-sacrificial-formula.png" width="298" /></a></div><br />
There is also a "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoan_religion#Possibility_of_human_sacrifice">dark side</a>" of Minoan customs we should not ommit the mention of. The deep discordance of Middle Minoan arcaeological finds (when animal sacrifice was common), and the Linear B archives of Knossos, that clearly avoids any mentions of bloody sacrifices, cries out for an answer. Because regular animal sacrifice was mentioned at Pylos, this must have been a specifically Cretan trend. One cannot dismiss the deduction that the avoidance of bloody rites was a kind of "rebound", in response to the morally repugnant practice of human sacrifice on Crete, rarely, but definitely seen in both Middle and Late Minoan <a href="http://www.uk.digiserve.com/mentor/minoan/anemospilia.htm">archaelogical contexts</a>. As in Pylos, this kind of action was likely a "last resort": only executed in times of great calamities. If there is any historical basis of Greek myths, in particular the legend of the Minotaur, we may assume that it were the early Greeks who put an end to the Minoans' unsavoury willingness to sacrifice young boys and girls to their gods if their outlooks on war were grim. But as it was just a far-flung extension of the annual, usual religious ceremonies involving animal slaughter and feasting, the Greek rulers might have opted to suppress these customs altogether. Though they probably did not die out, as the sacrificial scenes on the Haghia Triada sacrophagus suggest - this marvellous piece of Cretan art was clearly made under the late Mycaenean era (ca. 1370-1320 BC).Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-80950461270814099502011-06-27T16:00:00.000-07:002011-06-27T16:05:33.117-07:00'Governor' in Minoan - the origins of Greek ΒασιλεύςHello again, dear readers! To keep the interest in this little blog, I have decided to leave the topic of toponyms for a while, and cruise into foreign waters. One thing the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/04/gleaning-cretan-place-names-from-linear.html">classification</a> of Linear A terms was exceptionally good for - to get those words, which are (with high probability) <i>not</i> toponyms. But it is not chaff that remained in our hands after gleaning out the place-names. Rather, it is a handful of gems. We shall see, that some of these terms turn out to be administrative titles, that - by finding their original phonetic values - can be identified with Mycaenean and even Modern Greek words!<br />
<br />
One term in question traditionally reads as <b>QA-*118</b>, and has a clearly related word in the form <b>QI-*118</b>. Although these terms are mentioned all across the island (Haghia Triada, Khania, Archanes, Zakros), they never occur on place-name lists. Instead, they look a lot like titles, especially QI-*118, that typically stands alongside hapax legomena (one-time terms, highly likely personal names). <br />
<br />
But how do these terms read? To get an idea, we have to go back to one of the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/01/solution-for-problem-evolution-of.html">earlier posts</a>, where I suggested the Lin A *118 / Lin B *83 sign to be read with a value ZI (based on the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/05/what-do-minoan-linear-tablets-tell-us.html">identity</a> of place-names DA-SI-*118 / DA-*83-JA). Plugging this value into the cited titles yields readings <b>QA-ZI</b> and <b>QI-ZI</b>. This is nice, but we are not done yet: There are still a few mentions of <i>derived cases</i> from QA-ZI - with some strange extensions. They had to be set apart from the common <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/02/i-particle-of-minoan-language.html"><i>*i-</i> prefix</a> that likely denotes a deictic or connector ('that', 'which', 'what') - frequently seen on initial words or in longer phrases. <br />
<br />
On HT70 we can read a form QA-*118-[*]: the sign on the place of the asterisk could equally have been SA or RE (undecidable, since a breakage line runs straight through it). On the other hand, HT96 clearly gives a form QA-*118-RA-RE. Here the sudden occurrance of an -R- after QA-ZI implies that the stem word ended with a consonant (<i>*-r</i> or <i>*-l</i>), simply ommitted due to the Linear A writing conventions. It is only seen here because of the addition of the <i>*-(a)le</i> suffix onto the stem: that case-ending is supported by a number of other Minoan words (e.g. compare JA-MI-DA-RE [HT122, toponym on a list] with A-MI-DA-U [ZA10, the same toponym on another list]). <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-25yCS9ETC9w/TgYvysNTIgI/AAAAAAAAAlI/LOlBhh9TeiI/s1600/Byzantine-emperors.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-25yCS9ETC9w/TgYvysNTIgI/AAAAAAAAAlI/LOlBhh9TeiI/s320/Byzantine-emperors.png" width="196" /></a></div><br />
This is the point when one would suddenly feel enlightned: After all, the form QA-ZI-R is almost exactly the same as the Mycaenean (Linear B) <b>QA-SI-RE-U</b>, meaning 'village chieftain' or 'governor'. Actually, it is also the same stem what the Greek word for 'king': <b>βασιλεύς</b> (or modern Greek <b>βασιλιάς</b>) shows! The Pre-Greek origin of <i>basileus</i> / QA-SI-RE-U was already suggested by many linguists, yet no one was able to pin-point the origins of the stem. Now we have a plausible ancestor, for the first time! <br />
<br />
It has to be mentioned though, that there are a lot of phonological ambiguities regarding both QA-SI-RE-U and QA-ZI. The Z-series probably expressed affricates (<i>*ts</i>), however, this is not a 100% proven fact. The interpretation of the Q-series is even more difficult: while they probably stand for <i>*kw</i> or <i>*gw</i> in the Mycaenean texts, no one can be sure of their Minoan values: this could theoretically be <i>*kw</i>, <i>*gw</i>, <i>*g</i>, <i>*ḫw</i> or even <i>*ḫ</i>. Therefore I will henceforth render these terms in my article with their traditional values (e.g. <i>*qasileus</i> instead of <i>*gwasileus</i> and <i>*qazil</i> instead of any other speculative value). <br />
<br />
Going back to the Linear A tablets, the lists clearly support the important role of <i>*qazil</i>: for example, on HT96, more than 40 units of grain are noted (approx. 1300 litres, if measured by volume: a high quantity for a person compared to other tablets) as being donated by the <i>*qazil</i>. The first term in the sequence A-PA-RA-NE • QA-ZI-RA-RE specifies the circumstance or the recipient of this donation, and may possibly be connected with the theonym <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/05/divine-names-on-linear-tablets.html">Apollon</a> (who might have received gifts from the <i>*qazil</i>). HT131 also reports a considerable quantity (58 units) of grain as paid by the QA-ZI. On ARKH2 (see figure), a particularly concise list can be found: the first two entries probably refer to inhabitants of a place <i>*Sidata</i>, that returns in the second line in the form A-SI-DA-TO-I. It is speculative, but based on the form of toponyms found on jars (e.g. A-[WO]-KI-TA-A vs. WO-KI-TA or A-TU-RI-SI-TI vs. TU-RU-SA) it could denote an ethnic in a grammatically strange way (by the addition of an <i>*a-</i> prefix ('who'?) and a locative or similar suffix simulateously). It is the 3rd line where we see a combination of a personal name and the title QI-ZI.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NkMN3K1wnAc/TgYvmnfqudI/AAAAAAAAAlE/KN2BoLHRPXU/s1600/Linear-A-tablet-ARKH2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NkMN3K1wnAc/TgYvmnfqudI/AAAAAAAAAlE/KN2BoLHRPXU/s320/Linear-A-tablet-ARKH2.png" width="289" /></a></div><br />
One thing remains problematic, though: In linear B, we have the terms QA-SI-RE-U (<i>*qasileus</i>, 'governor') and QA-SI-RE-WI-JA (<i>*qasilewiya</i>, 'governance'), while Linear A shows the forms QA-ZI (<i>*qazil</i>) and QI-ZI (<i>*qizil</i>). The variation of the Linear A forms looks pretty regular and they are clearly not dialectal variants (e.g. both forms are attested from Khania, compare KH10 with KH88), just like their Linear B parallels. Now, which one is which? The troblesome question of assignment is fortunately eased by the <i>context</i> the terms are mentioned at. In Linear B, QA-SI-RE-U would normally attract a nominative case, if mentioned together with the name of the official (which is rare), while QA-SI-RE-WI-JA typically stands alongside personal names in genitives (as the example from Knossos: SE-TO-I-JA • SU-KE-RE-O • QA-SI-RE-WI-JA [As(2)1516] shows). <br />
<br />
In Linear A, QA-ZI mostly stands alone, without a name (on all mentions at HT). Only a single tablet from Khania [KH10] mentions a longer statement, namely: I-PA-SA-JA • QA-ZI • A-KI-PI-E-TE. While I-PA-SA-JA could be an adjectival term of PA-SE - a word common at Haghia Triada (with the <i>*i-</i> prefix and a <i>*-ja</i> suffix added, resulting in a phrase 'that(the)-[PA-SE]-ian') - it is unlikely that this would refer to a place. Yet it could easily parallel the names standing in genitive as seen in Linear B. At the same time, the hapax term A-KI-PI-E-TE could be a toponym by the virtue of its elative <i>*-(a)te</i> suffix. On the other hand, the phrase QI-ZI regularly (always) stands alongside personal names of various endings, as another tablet-header from Khania [KH88] illustrates: QA-NU-MA • QI-ZI. Since there is no trace of any grammatical ending on those names, it is tempting to believe that QI-ZI was the title itself (= QA-SI-RE-U), while QA-ZI refers to the office (= QA-SI-RE-WI-JA). This is also what the Greek terms would suggest; so the person who led a <i>*qazil</i> was simply called <i>*qasileus</i>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8-gyrgwXIzg/TgcWV21Mn1I/AAAAAAAAAlM/Hk3R1WM5UCQ/s1600/Odysseus.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="299" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8-gyrgwXIzg/TgcWV21Mn1I/AAAAAAAAAlM/Hk3R1WM5UCQ/s320/Odysseus.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
Our identification also has far-reaching ramifications regarding the origins of the Greek suffix <i>*-εύς</i>. Here, the opinion of the scholars is still deeply divided: some cling to it being a genuine Greek grammatical element, while others (especially Beekes) proposed it to be a loaned structure. But we now see that - while the <i>stem</i> of words in <i>*-εύς</i> might be of foreign origin - this suffix appears to be a normal part of the Myceaenean Greek (but not of the Minoan) language. <br />
<br />
A very interesting parallel to the word <i>βασιλεύς</i> could be the stem of the name <i>Ὀδυσσεύς</i>. Although Classic Greek may also offer (a somewhat artificial) etymology for <i>Odysseus</i>, it is widely believed to be a Pre-Greek loanword. <a href="http://paleoglot.blogspot.com/2009/11/pre-greek-name-for-odysseus.html">The theories</a> on its origins have not yet reached a conclusive result. As for me, I find it interesting to compare the name <i>Ὀδυσσεύς</i> with the prehellenic place-name <i>*Udweza</i> - found in Linear A as U-DE-ZA or U-DWE-ZA (there were likely multiple towns by this name across the Aegean). The <i>*-εύς</i> ending could have been added by the Achaian Greeks, then. Yet it is nothing but a weak parallel - because frankly, we know nothing of the true meaning of <i>*Udweza</i>, and thus cannot fit it with the usual 'agentive' meaning of <i>*-εύς</i>. I can only hope that more examples of hellenized Minoan words will be uncovered in the future, to enlighten us in these matters.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-22051910747692814952011-06-18T10:00:00.000-07:002011-06-19T03:26:05.396-07:00Place-names on Cretan sealstones - A key to the decipherment of Minoan Hieroglyphics?There is one last post I would like to append to my long series on bronze-age Cretan place-names. This one will encompass some fairly new research into the oldest relics of Minoan writing. I am struggling to make it simple, so I hope you will find it interesting even without being a professional in ancient writing systems.<br />
<br />
In my <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/06/new-map-of-middle-minoan-crete.html">previous post</a>, I mentioned that some words found on Cretan hieroglyphic seals can be interpreted as place-names. I also made a number of assumptions when reading toponyms in Linear A. For example, one of the place-names was reconstructed there as *306-KI-TA, from barely two occurrences of the name - both texts were damaged, and they were showing derived cases only. This would have left this toponym highly tentative - until now.<br />
<br />
While browsing the <a href="http://www.google.hu/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbas.sciant.unifi.it%2Fchs.php&rct=j&q=hieroglyphic%20seals%20database&ei=KNr8TfLGFIPCswbH6qTyDQ&usg=AFQjCNGFy7uHzzDQaLiWJ8BdBFQkCBCJRQ&sig2=oXTt55UK_gJ_V3N8IIXGYw&cad=rja">database</a> for Cretan hieroglyphic seals, to either confirm or dismiss the idea about reading place-names on sealstones, I came across specimen CHIC302. This single seal presents a word <b>WO-KI-TA</b> - a toponym in its "base" case, just as it was predicted from Linear A! To get this reading, some very simple rules have to be kept in mind: The sealstone is actually a multi-faceted bar. It was drilled in the middle, in order to be worn on a necklace by the owner. When used to "sign" a document, the bar was rotated on a flat layer of clay (by an indefinite number of times), to give a continuous impression. Therefore the sign-groups on each facet are not independent from each other. On the contrary: they give a coherent text from the start until the end, with many of the words "overflowing" from one side to another. There are no word-divisors to help us, just small "start signs" to emphasize the direction of reading. In most cases, the inscriptions turn out to be <i>boustrophedons</i>: The signs are arranged in the most economic way possible, and their direction reverses (alternates) each line.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IqPsQQnjR7w/TfzXjRDyiwI/AAAAAAAAAk0/R0bis5fb5M4/s1600/Sealstone-inscription-01.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="319" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IqPsQQnjR7w/TfzXjRDyiwI/AAAAAAAAAk0/R0bis5fb5M4/s320/Sealstone-inscription-01.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
On the cited sealstone (CHIC302), there is only one facet that has a start sign on it. Therefore it is concieveable that reading has to be started there. While the <i>introductory term</i> is found on certain other seals with longer text, we do not have any hint on its meaning. On the other hand, the second side clearly presents a hapax: a one-time word, suggesting that this is a <i>personal name</i>. The immediately following term consists of three signs, and it is reasonably common on other seals as well. Although the value of the middle sign is uncertain, a potential reading could be JA-RA-RE. In some seals, it returns as JA-RA only (basic case?). I labelled it <i>secondary title</i>, to reflect the fact that it is not an obligatory component of any sealstone, and found only on a fraction of them - but there, it can also substitute a personal name. Next comes the term WO-KI-TA (split between two facets) - this is clearly a place-name, based on Linear A parallels, and could be an early reference to <i>Lyttos</i>. The last two signs make up an incredibly common word - found on most seals. This is what I call <i>primary title</i>. Despite the fancy name, I have no idea of its precise reading or meaning: it could have designated an impersonal entity as well ("polity", "kingdom", "province", etc.)<br />
<br />
Perhaps it is useful to make a de-tour from the topic, and examine the Eteocretan material for parallels. Unfortunately, <a href="http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Eteocretan/Eteocretan.html">Eteocretan inscriptions</a> are few and far between, and most of them are pretty fragmentary. Yet one of the Praisian stone slabs offers us a particularly interesting insight to the sequence seen on CHIC302. On the second line of <a href="http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Eteocretan/Praisos2.html">the stone</a>, the following sequence can be read (in Ionic letters): ?δο??ιαραλαφραισοιιναι. Unfortunately there is no word separation; yet - if we follow van Effenterre's considerations - we can be almost sure that the word *<i>inai</i> was separate. This phrase is also seen on a bilingual Drerian <a href="http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Eteocretan/Dreros1.html">inscription</a>, where it seems to parallel the Doric Greek verb εϝαδε = "(it) pleased", "(it was) decided", "(it) came to pass that". If so, it is most plausible that it be preceded by a name or a title - or even a series of them. That phrase could have been either *<i>?doph? iarala Phraisoi</i> (this is the most straightforward one) or *<i>?doph? iaral Aphraisoi</i> (this is what Linear A parallels suggest - c.f. SI-DA-TE vs. A-SI-DA-TO-I, both on ARKH2). In either case, the term *<i>iaral(a)</i> could correspond to our "<i>secondary title</i>" JA-RA-RE. Note that there is not a single occurrance with an initial A-, so the J- initial was probably part of the stem, and not an attached prefix particle. That would make it similar to the Greek word ἱερός (='holy'), despite the fact that ἱερός has a good Indo-European etymology: It is thought to stem from PIE <i>*(e)is-əro</i> = 'exalted one', making any connections to the Minoan title <i>*yara-(a)le</i> very dubious.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-eGskM-yGeFY/TfzXnbBiRmI/AAAAAAAAAk4/OfJ8mxcBKFc/s1600/Sealstone-inscription-02.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-eGskM-yGeFY/TfzXnbBiRmI/AAAAAAAAAk4/OfJ8mxcBKFc/s320/Sealstone-inscription-02.png" width="254" /></a></div><br />
CHIC302 is not the only seal that features toponyms. There are at least a dozen seals with comparably long inscriptions. But the scarcity of signs with easily identifiable Linear A counterparts severely limits our reading capability. Four other seals exist that feature the term <b>KI-TA-NA</b> or its derivatives. CHIC295 has a fairly similar composition of names and titles as we have seen before. The text is also a boustrophedon - this is highlighted by the "start signs", featured in every line. The only interesting feature of this seal is the presence of not one, but <i>two primary titles</i>. Conversely, the second title seems to be declined - as it possesses both a prefix (the MA- prefix seen on the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/06/exploring-patterns-on-infamous-phaistos.html">Phaistos Disc</a>) and a suffix (perhaps -SE or -RI). However, I can offer no guide on whatever these might mean. <br />
<br />
Some caution is yet to be exercised; in spite of the plausibility of these readings. I have intentionally selected seals that have a relatively clear composition and direction of reading. Many of the seals are not so easily cracked: they are full of artistic ligatures, complicated circular arrangements of signs, and decorative placeholders - that might <i>look like signs</i> - while they are in fact <i>nullities</i> - fancy decorations only. Sometimes they are even inserted in the middle of a line - making the job of the reader really hard.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HlJEcbMUP7Y/TfzXueZUQYI/AAAAAAAAAk8/Ms1u9F0kuT0/s1600/Sealstone-inscription-03.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HlJEcbMUP7Y/TfzXueZUQYI/AAAAAAAAAk8/Ms1u9F0kuT0/s320/Sealstone-inscription-03.png" width="214" /></a></div><br />
This problem also applies to sealstone CHIC260: a nice triangle-based prism with rather clear figures. The reading of the first line is however, dubious: it depends on whether we regard the simple, circular drill as a sign (Hiero *73, probably QE, giving the name <b>JA-QE-RA</b>), or a nullity, in which case the remaining signs form a "secondary title" <b>JA-RA</b>. In the second and the third line, an already familiar term is found: these signs read <b>KI-TA-NA-SI</b>, a declined form of KI-TA-NA, similar to what is seen in Linear A on the pithos PEZb3: KI-TA-NA-SI-JA-SE. Finally, the last two signs give the same "primary title" as seen on all our previous examples. We can see that in this case, reading is linear: this is due to the mathematical impossibility to make an infinite but regular boustrophedon from an odd base number of sides on the prism to be rotated.<br />
<br />
No matter how many sealstones exist in the museums of the world (CHIC260 and CHIC302 can be seen in life at the Metropolitan Museum, New York, while CHIC295 resides on Crete, in the Iraklio Museum), the find-spots of specimens are rarely known. This is because they are valuable, and can be looted rather easily from tombs. Therefore we do not know where CHIC302 hails from: but it could have been plundered off Kastelli hill (the site of ancient Lyktos). Out of the four seals which feature KI-TA-NA, only two has a known provenience: CHIC238 comes from <i>Mochlos</i> and CHIC310 was found near <i>Sitia</i>. Looking at the map where these places lie shows a spectacular overlap with Linear A inscriptions containing KI-TA-NA: all these spots concentrate in a well defined area of easternmost Crete. While the vessels tell only little of history and geography (as they are traded freely), the presence of sealstones with the same city-name over a wider area paints a more definite picture on the political landscape of eastern Crete. It could easily imply that the towns at Mochlos and Sitia - and perhaps Palaikastro, Praisos and Makryghialos as well - fell under the same single authority. Given the impressive size of its city-center ("palace"), that central authority could not have been other than the polity of <i>Zakros</i>. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-epIoI2-Wp3o/TfzX5jVxGsI/AAAAAAAAAlA/C798spSE34A/s1600/KI-TA-NA-map.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="293" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-epIoI2-Wp3o/TfzX5jVxGsI/AAAAAAAAAlA/C798spSE34A/s320/KI-TA-NA-map.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
Based upon this realization, I slightly amended the <a href="http://www.athenapub.com/11petras.htm">map</a> of Prof. Metaxia Tsipopoulou: the spread of references to KI-TA-NA implies that Eastern Crete was a politically unified entity, not a collection of rivalling city-states as previously assumed. While Zakros was deserted after the LMIb period - making it a ghost-town in the Mycaenean era, it was not completely erased from memory. For example, the Linear B tablet Am821 clearly refers to a person as hailing from KI-TA-NE-TO • SU-RI-MO. The latter name is known to be a place lying on the easternmost end of the island, together with U-TA-NO: Thus <i>*Surimos</i> could have been the same as <i>Palaikastro</i> (it was a powerful settlement in the LMIII era), and *<i>Utanos</i> the neighbouring <i>Itanos</i>. So it could be that Mycaenean Greeks still referred to the Eastern Lasithi province as KI-TA-NE-TO, despite the earlier demise of its name-giving capital city at Zakros.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-81727211402364820292011-06-05T15:00:00.000-07:002011-07-09T05:23:05.814-07:00A new map of Middle Minoan Crete - Assessing the place-names on vessels inscribed with Linear AGreetings to all my readers once again. In the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/05/what-do-minoan-linear-tablets-tell-us_17.html">previous series</a> of posts, we have seen ample examples of place-names on the Linear A tablets. But miscellaneous objects inscribed in Linear A were not yet discussed. As we shall see, Cretan vessels - both religious and profane vases - will turn out to be a real treasure trove of Minoan toponyms. And since they were found all across the island, they can be used to map out where these places were actually located!<br />
<br />
There are a number of reasons why jars or amphores would be inscribed. The most practical reason is that it makes them easier to administer, just think about trade! This is the very reason why so many vases were found from the Mycaenean era, containing in scriptions in Linear B. Kim Raymoure has a <a href="http://minoan.deaditerranean.com/2011/03/26/linear-b-inscribed-stirrup-jars-isjs/">nice collection</a> of such jars-texts on her website. These texts are typically short, consisting almost exlcusively of names: anthroponyms (personal names), toponyms (place-names) or a combination of both, with some titles mixed in. In case only a single word is inscribed, it is most frequently a name of a town. Obviously, they describe the provenience of the vessel or the producer of its contents. Finding such jars on one place inscribed with the name of another is a clear indicator of trade relationships; and can be used to map out ancient trade routes.<br />
<br />
Religious vases and altar-stones were inscribed for different reasons. Given that most ancient (and modern) temples acquired their prosperity and material wealth through donations, many objects that are inscribed contain the name of their donors. The more important sanctuaries could amass a respectable amount of goods through the centuries or millennia. It is enough to take a look at the ruins of the Oracle at Delphi; where most of the ruins enclosed within the temenos wall belong to treasuries from various polities. Athens erected a separate building for them, so did Sparta, Argos, Thebes and Corinth. Even smaller polities, like Siphnos or Sicyon had their very own treasury constructed, and the sanctuary received items from as far as Knidos, the opposite end of the Aegean Sea. Obviously, the "attraction radius" of a sanctuary was proportional to its imporance: minor temples might have received donations only from their immediate surroundings. Given this tradition of state (or polity) gifts, finding toponyms on materwork Minoan vessels that once served as libation cups or portable altar-stones (the so-called libation tables) is the least surprising discovery. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9GcnvSu91T4/ThhGftwJRzI/AAAAAAAAAlg/GGbdt3aFwnA/s1600/Two-libation-vessels-amended.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="279" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9GcnvSu91T4/ThhGftwJRzI/AAAAAAAAAlg/GGbdt3aFwnA/s320/Two-libation-vessels-amended.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
First of all, take a look at the stone libation vessel found at Apodoulou (slightly north-west from Phaistos). This cup has a number of interesting phrases on it (see figure). The key word is <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/03/word-i-pi-na-ma-blood-or-honey.html">I-PI-NA-MA</a>, that is repeated in the lower line as I-PI-NA-MI-NA-TE (restored reading). But it is a toponym that is most intesting. One of the words very clearly reads I-KU-PA3-NA-TU-NA-TE (the first sign has only its corner visible). This very name returns as <b>KU-PA3-NA-TU</b> (without the <i>*i-</i> prefix and the <i>*-ate</i> suffix) on Haghia Triada tablets HT47 and HT119. The latter tablet probably lists people by places (it was not included in my previous lists due to the ambiguous topic). It is very unlikely that the name would be independent of <b>KU-PA3-NU</b>, another putative place-name: rather, it just seems to be a regular variant. On the tablets, KU-PA3-NU very frequently groups with genuine western Cretan names (e.g. KU-DO-NI); this could mean if KU-PA3-NU and KU-PA3-NA-TU are one and the same (or two, directly next to each other), they should definitely lie west of Phaistos, probably in west-central Crete.<br />
<br />
References to a place <b>SU-KI-RI-TA</b> are encountered on vases found at Phaistos and Haghia Triada. This time we have an easier job: SU-KI-RI-TA is not only commonly mentioned in Linear B at Knossos (when it was apparently a local province capital of some sort), but the place is extant: it is none else than Classical <i>Sybrita</i>, modern <i>Syvritos</i>. Its location south-west of the Idaian range can explain the distribution of its references reasonably well. <br />
<br />
Turning to the Linear B documents, apart from SU-KI-RI-TA and PA-I-TO, there is a third place that is mentioned as having its very own QA-SI-RE-WI-JA (local chieftaindom): <b>SE-TO-I-JA</b>. Despite the obvious similarity with the name of modern <i>Sitia</i> (ancient <i>Séteia</i>), this identification is not necessarily straightforward or correct. SE-TO-I-JA never groups with eastern Cretan places on the Knossos tablets, and in Linear A, it is mentioned only on a libation table found at Prassas, next to Knossos. A second, doubtful mention could be on the libation table found in the Psychro cave (PS Za 2), where a word [?-?-?]-JA-TI was restored as SE-TO-I-JA-TI by Gareth Owens, based on the length of the missing fragment and the rarity of other place-names in Linear A ending with -JA. Nevertheless, his identification of SE-TO-I-JA with Archanes is questionable: Why would a town so close to Knossos be a local province capital? Judged by the considerable distance of Sybrita (westwards) and Phaistos (southwards) from Knossos, it is more plausible that SE-TO-I-JA was a key city on eastern Crete, perhaps lying at <a href="http://www.uk.digiserve.com/mentor/minoan/malia.htm">Mallia</a> or even further to the east. These local centres are seldom mentioned on Linear B place-name lists, making their localization difficult by groupings alone. Therefore I do not yet discard the original hypothesis of placing SE-TO-I-JA to Sitia (i.e. the Minoan site of <a href="http://www.petras-excavations.gr/">Petras</a>, near Sitia).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ca5cD6vbeVo/TeuVE3AhGOI/AAAAAAAAAkE/duVANOzQjXE/s1600/Inscribed-objects-from-Crete.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="241" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ca5cD6vbeVo/TeuVE3AhGOI/AAAAAAAAAkE/duVANOzQjXE/s320/Inscribed-objects-from-Crete.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
On a mundane amphore from Tylissos, another interesting term can be read. The text consists of a single word: A-[*]-KI-TA-A: The sign originally standing at position * was probably *306 (it is still partly visible), before it was erased and changed to *301. Because we already have a putative toponym from the Haghia Triada tablet HT122 in the form [?]-*306-KI-TA2, the correcture of the scribe was likely erroneous. While the reading of Lin A *306 is officially "unknown", it very closely <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2009/09/linear-306-sign-searching-for-value.html">corresponds</a> to Linear B sign *42, that is, WO. Such a phonetic value is not unlikely in Linear A, either, because semivowels, including approximants are commonly seen in word-initial positions. Yet even if the stem word was indeed <b>WO-KI-TA</b>, it is hard to identify it with any Cretan place. Well, unless "Luke" is a "wookie" [StarWars pun intended], in which case <i>*Wúkita</i> could be Mycaenean <i>Lukitos</i> (Lin B RU-KI-TO), modern <i>Lyttos</i>. Unfortunately, while the change of laterals into approximants is common in all languages of the world, I have no idea if the reverse process could ever happen. But at least at some rare borrowings, the initial <i>*w-</i> can change over to other consonants, as the example of the <a href="http://www.livius.org/be-bm/behistun/behistun01.html">Behistun inscriptions</a> show: the Old Persian name <i>Wishtashpa</i> (= Greek <i>Hystaspes</i>, the father of Great King Darius I) is repeated in the form <i>Mishtashba</i> in the Elamite text. (Use of the same cuneiform sytem makes a scribal error extremely unlikely.) Therefore I do not discard this theory, that gets further support from the Knossos archives: Lyktos is probably the most commonly mentioned place on all tablets. It likely also had strong trade connections with Tylissos, as these places are frequently mentioned together. This could easily explain why excavations have discovered a vase at Tylissos, imported from Lyktos. And at least on a single tablet, Lyktos is also listed together with Daos (perhaps Haghia Triada itself). But even without direct identification, the distribution of places where *306-KI-TA was mentioned would place <i>*Wúkita</i> somewhere into central Crete, close enough to Lyktos anyway. <br />
<br />
Speaking about Haghia Triada, it is an interesting fact that none of the place-names mentioned on the HT tablets can be equated with the town itself. From the Linear B material we know however, that Phaistos did have a sister-town called <i>Daos</i> (DA-WO, almost always paired with PA-I-TO). Yet by sheer luck, there is a single fragment of a libation vessel found at Knossos (KN Za 10, see figure), that contains a severely damaged series of signs; the term <b>DA-WA-[SI?]</b> is still readable. If interpreted correctly (I am uncertain if putting an "arbitrary" divisor to the broken off segment was right), that could mean that it was <i>*Dawa</i>, that is <i>Daos</i> (i.e. Haghia Triada) that donated this stone plate to the temple of Knossos and the offerings it once held to please the gods. <br />
<br />
The original Minoan name of <i>Tylissos</i> (Linear B TU-RI-SO) is similarly difficult to find out. In this case, the documents supply us with not one, but two candidates. One of them is <b>DU-RE-ZA</b>, a toponym on the clay tablets found at Khania and Zakros; the other one is a certain <b>TU-RU-SA</b> mentioned on a vessel at Kophinas and also at Knossos (in the form of A-TU-RI-SI-TI). I have no idea whether <i>*Duletsa</i> or <i>*Tursa</i> is a better match for Tylissos: I leave it to the reader to decide which one looks like a better candidate. <br />
<br />
The site of the mountain-sanctuary of Syme also bestowed us a number of probable toponyms. Out of these many, the term <b>PA3-NI</b> stands out. This place is also frequently mentioned at Haghia Triada, as a donor of specialized agricultural goods (such as figs, several types of grain, malt, etc.). The occurrance of this term at Syme (one time securely on SY Za4, and possibly another time on SY Za7) hints that this was a place at mid-eastern Crete. Perhaps it is not an overtly bold step to search for PA3-NI in the Hierapetra region. A large settlement at that time: <a href="http://www.uk.digiserve.com/mentor/minoan/gournia.htm">Gournia</a> is definitely a good candidate. It is also worth to note that PA3-NI is very frequently paired with <b>DI-RI-NA</b> (<i>*Drina</i>) on the Haghia Triada tablets. Eerily enough, there is a small town called <i>Prina</i> roughly 15kms west from the excavation site of Gournia, but I am not sure if that town's name is ancient. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7EcqoyCcUNA/TeuVQWKVSLI/AAAAAAAAAkI/SMDbsY_U_QM/s1600/Provisional-Cretan-Map.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="181" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7EcqoyCcUNA/TeuVQWKVSLI/AAAAAAAAAkI/SMDbsY_U_QM/s320/Provisional-Cretan-Map.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
Some of the terms provisionally transliterated by John Younger (whom I cannot thank enough for providing <a href="http://people.ku.edu/%7Ejyounger/LinearA/LinA_Syme.pdf">on-line access</a> to the original images) need slight corrections. One of the terms, now read as JA-PA-RA-JA-NA-SE is especially interesting, as it seems to recall the same stem as the famous historical polity <i>Praisos</i> has. The town of Praisos has at least 4000 years of history: Several middle and late minoan ruins were excavated in the region, at Zou and at Praisos itself. Later into the classical era, Praisos was one of the last strongholds of <a href="http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Eteocretan/Eteocretan.html">Eteocretans</a> and their poorly understood language. Nevertheless, the term <b>*A-PA-RA-JA</b> (<i>*Apraya</i>) looks like an un-derived original version (i.e. without the <i>*-(i)ssos</i> ending), but it is suffixed similarly to the Eteocretan ethnic term <i>Phraisona</i>. <br />
<br />
Two eastern cretan locations: Petras and Palaikastro supply us with references to a place called <b>*KI-TA-NA</b>. Because this very term also appears on a number of <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/02/how-to-read-minoan-hieroglyphics.html">hieroglyphic seals</a> (e.g. from Mochlos and Sitia), it must have been a place of paramount importance. There is one more-or-less obvious candidate on the eastern end of Crete: the palatial site of <a href="http://www.uk.digiserve.com/mentor/minoan/zakros.htm">Zakros</a>. This toponym is not seen anywhere in the Linear B archives, which is explained well by the fact that the town of Zakros and many other places lay in ruins and were completely uninhabited by that time. Note that the name of Palaikastro (Greek: "Old Castle") is not ancient, either, but I was unable to find any reliable reference to that in Linear A materials (yet it is likely that the town is mentioned in Linear B). In contrast to that, the name of another mid-eastern Cretan town: <i>Polychna</i> (perhaps modern Vryses, near Mallia) returns as <b>PU-RE-KA-NA</b> on one of the Hieroglyphic <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/10/tracking-evolution-of-ka-and-qe-signs.html">seal impressions</a> found at Knossos. The name <i>*Pulekna</i> (which I initially incorrectly assumed to be a personal name) shows a very nice correspondence with <i>Polychna</i>, the latter one seems to be a hellenized version (as <i>*pule-</i> is meaningless in Greek, but <i>*poly-</i> would mean "many"). Simiar warpings can be found in the names <i>Aptera</i>, earlier <i>Aptawa</i>, Linear B A-PA-TA-WA (πτερος = "wing") and <i>Hierapetra</i>, previously <i>Hierapythna</i> (πετρα = "stone"). These un-systematic changes testament the process how certain, originally non-Greek names became established in Hellenic dialects. But the very same fact makes their reconstruction difficult. Yet we have seen it is not impossible, fortunately for us.<br />
<br />
As a special gift, I made a supplementary figure - a map to show all places we have talked about at once. Although I did not discuss that before, it also displays the potential location of <b>KU-DA</b> (HT122), likely the same as classic <i>Kytaion</i> (Lin B KU-TA-I-TO ?), as well as <b>DA-RE</b> (potentially <i>Tarra</i>, on south-western Crete).Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-87770761446701795712011-05-17T16:00:00.000-07:002011-05-21T01:10:56.881-07:00What do the Minoan Linear A tablets tell us about Cretan geography? - Part IIAs planned, I shall continue with our <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/05/what-do-minoan-linear-tablets-tell-us.html">discussion</a> of known and putative toponyms in Linear A. As we have seen it before, these place-names are not just mentioned haphazardly, but are clearly grouped on the tablets, for example - by geographic proximity. So the overall situation is similar to what is seen on Linear B documents, particularly the Pylos and Knossos archives.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, many of the Linear A tablets are damaged, broken off, abraded or simply fragmentary. This very fact makes it difficult to read an entire tablet from its start to the end, and even more difficult, to understand the precise context of listings. Yet while individual names are difficult to restore, terms that recur repeatedly again and again are much easier to guess at. For example, it does not take heavy imagination to reconstruct the word [?-?]-TI-JO as PA-I-TI-JO (<i>*Phaistios</i> = 'of Phaistos') on Linear B tablet As1516. <br />
<br />
A similar method can also be applied to certain Linear A tablets. A heavily fragmented tablet from Phaistos (<a href="http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/pix/PH_31_tablet.jpg">PH31</a>) dealing with flocks of animals was already partly restored by John Younger. It defintitely made his job easier that most of the names seem to be toponyms that very frequently recur on other tablets from the neighbouring Haghia Triada. In my current post, I shall attempt a similar reconstruction of entries on Haghia Triada tablet HT122. <br />
<br />
<table align="center" cols="3" style="border: 2px ridge green;"><tbody>
<tr> <th colspan="3" style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle;">Tablet PH 31 (reconstructed)</th> </tr>
<tr> <th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 30%;"> Statement </th> <th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 50%;"> Item </th> <th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 20%;"> Quantity </th> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">? </td> <td align="center">CAPf (nanny-goat)</td> <td align="center">2</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">OVISf (sheep/ewe)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">?-DU-RI</td> <td align="center">CAPm (billy-goat)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">TU-JU-MA</td> <td align="center">CAPf (nanny-goat)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">PA-TA-NE</td> <td align="center">CAPm (billy-goat) </td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr><td align="center"></td> <td align="center">CAPf (nanny-goat)</td> <td align="center">5</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">TE-RI</td> <td align="center">OVISm (sheep/ram)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">OVISf (sheep/ewe)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">RI-RU-MA-TI</td> <td align="center">OVISm SI+AU+RE</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">A-MI-DA-O</td> <td align="center">OVISm (sheep/ram)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">?</td> <td align="center">SI+AU+RE (young?)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">QA-QA-RU</td> <td align="center">CAPm+KU (? goat)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">MA-DI</td> <td align="center">OVISm (sheep/ram)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">OVISf (sheep/ewe)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">OVISm (sheep/ram)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">KU-PA3-NU</td> <td align="center">SI+AU+RE (young?)</td> <td align="center">1</td></tr>
<tr> <td align="center">PA-TA-DA</td> <td align="center">OVISm (sheep/ram)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">KU-RO</td><td align="center">CAPm+KU (? goat)</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">OVISm (sheep/ram)</td> <td align="center">5</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">OVISf (sheep/ewe)</td> <td align="center">3</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">CAPm (billy-goat)</td> <td align="center">2</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">CAPf (nanny-goat)</td> <td align="center">8</td> </tr>
</tbody> </table><br />
Tablet HT122 is one of those rare Linear A finds that list people instead of agricultural goods. (Such a theme is commonly seen in Linear B.) Moreover, a majority of entries on both sides of HT122 contain reference to multiple men or women. This is very difficult to explain other than assuming <i>a list of towns</i> under the control of the Phaistos polity, each one contributing to the personnel serving the kingdom. Sadly, the header of side A (that seems to be the starting point of this list) is largely broken off, so we cannot learn the purpose of gathering these people. Many of its entries were also obliterated when the tablet broke into pieces. Luckily, some of the names can still be restored, and we shall see very soon how.<br />
<br />
At the beginning of row 3, two terms were rendered largely illegible. But unlike the completely missing entry in the preceding row, small traces of the lower halves of signs are still clearly visible. Therefore we can be certain that whatever signs word PA-?-? contained at positions ?, they all had a long, straight vertical line at their lower end. Signs with this property are not that common: Only 20 syllabograms: A, I, U, DA, DI, ME, MU, NA, NI, PA, PO, RE, RO, RU, SA, SE, SI, TE, TO and ZA have this property. We also know - from the context - that the missing name should have been a toponym. This restriction leaves only one possible reconstruction: the missing term is none other than <b>PA-I-TO</b>, the town of <i>Phaistos</i>!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bhLLFjQJ7p8/TdGdpQVXzFI/AAAAAAAAAkA/8gjHAx-IlCI/s1600/HT122-reconstruction.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="283" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bhLLFjQJ7p8/TdGdpQVXzFI/AAAAAAAAAkA/8gjHAx-IlCI/s320/HT122-reconstruction.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
And we are not done yet! Substitution of the term PA-I-TO - together with the numerals following it - leaves a space for only one sign to precede the ?-DI ending of the next word. This time, the context of other place-name listing tablets helps us out: One of the more commonly seen term listed alongside with PA-I-TO is the putative toponym <b>MA-DI</b>. That would definitely fit here as well. One can even notice that the corner of the left ear of the 'cat-head' sign MA is still visible on the neighbouring fragment - a further nice bit of confirmation for the correctness of substitution. <br />
<br />
Some of the numeral values pertaining to the damaged entries can also be guessed at. We know that the sum of individual values was 31 (apart from KU-DA, that is not added to KU-RO, but instead carried over to side B and directly added to PO-TO-KU-RO). The numeral following PA-I-TO is completely missing, but we can still see two strokes following the completely obliterated name directly above it. That name itself was likely 3 syllabograms long (e.g. KU-DO-NI or RI-RU-MA), but cannot be restored just based on this property. Though we know that it contributed to the sum with 2+x persons. Now, if PA-I-TO sent y, then the equation x+y=10 must be satisfied. From the symmetric position of the two visible strokes, the numeral of the missing entry should have been even (odd numerals are mostly arranged in a way that strokes are not placed directly above each other). So - for example - if PA-I-TO gave 6 servants, then the unknown town must have given 4. Or reversed. Anyway, a numeral higher or equal to 8 is unlikely, compared with other values (it would not even fit the narrow space between PA-I-TO and MA-DI).<br />
<br />
Further down the tablet - in line 7 - there is another name largely obliterated by abrasion and fragmentation. Only the second sign is legible. Out of the first sign, only a single, barely visible oblique stroke remains. This makes our guess at ?-DU rather difficult. Based on the shape and peculiar direction of that single stroke, a RA sign could nicely fit in there. That would yield a reading of <b>RA-DU</b>, that is, the town of <i>Lato</i>, on east-central Crete (mentioned as RA-TO in Linear B). The same name is also found on tablet HT58 , starting with QE-TI RA-DU (despite the lack of word-dividers, we can be almost certain that word QE-TI was separate, as it is on the header of tablet HT7). The only problem with this interpretation is the fact that the ancient city of Lato (next to modern <i>Aghios Nikolaos</i>) lies much closer to the sites of Mallia and Knossos, than to Phaistos - making its status as tributary to the latter less plausible.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cols="3" style="border: 2px ridge green;"><tbody>
<tr> <th colspan="3" style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle;">Tablet HT122 (side B) - restored</th> </tr>
<tr> <th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 40%;"> Statement </th> <th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 30%;"> Item </th> <th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 30%;"> Quantity </th> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">JE-DI •</td> <td align="center">*346 • VIR (people)</td> <td align="center">40?</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">A?-*306-KI-TA2</td> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">7</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">TA-NA-TI?</td> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">10?</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">A-RA-JU U-DE-ZA</td> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">2</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">QA-QA-RU</td> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">2</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">DI</td> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">2</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">DA-RE</td> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">2</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">KU-RO</td> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">65</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">PO-TO-KU-RO</td> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">97</td></tr>
</tbody> </table><br />
The other side of the same tablet is - fortunately - much more complete. There is only one entry that is partly missing in line 2. Judged from the broken TA syllabogram at its start and considering its length, the name was probably <b>TA-NA-TI</b> - known from quite a few Linear A tablets. The only really interesting feature of side B is the large discrepancy of numbers at individual entries (always less than 10) and the whopping 65 after KU-RO. Even if we suppose that TA-NA-TI sent at least 10 men, on the end of the first line (following JE-DI) there should have been a numeral of 40. Otherwise the names seem to be wildly varied: sometimes abbreviated into a single syllable (<b>DI</b>), sometimes complimented with additional information. <b>A-RA-JU U-DE-ZA</b> looks like a precise reference to another U-DE-ZA town, near A-RA-JU. Similar geographical references are found on other Linear A tablets (e.g HT10: KU-NI-SU • SA-MA) as well as in Linear B (e.g. KO-NO-SO • TE-PE-JA on L641). It is tempting to see it as an attempt to separate towns with identical names, as a modern example of the German towns by the name <i>Frankfurt</i> shows (officially referred to as <i>Frankfurt am Main</i> and <i>Frankfurt an der Oder</i>). <br />
<br />
What have we learnt today? We have used our knowledge to successfully restore a tablet dealing with some sort of workforce assignment. This is just an illustration of what deeper understanding of Linear A tablets can give us. If we further our research into toponyms, we can definitely do even more. In the next post, we shall examine another source of evidence: libation tables and inscibed jars, to further us in our goal: to be able to draw a true map (with the names of towns in place) of Minoan Crete!Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-32402527200436639882011-05-01T09:01:00.000-07:002011-05-21T01:07:03.895-07:00What do the Minoan Linear A tablets tell us about Cretan geography? - Part ITime has come to continue <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2011/04/gleaning-cretan-place-names-from-linear.html">our discussion</a> about place-names found in Minoan Linear A contexts. As I mentioned before, one of the gravest problems of identifying toponyms on the Minoan tablets is their meager overlap with place-names known from Mycenaean Linear B - or to be more precise - the Knossos Linear B archive. Taking a look at the lists I posted previously, and a list of Linear B localties (for example, the concise list of Hart [Mnemosyne, 1965]) it becomes apparent that there are almost no exact matches (except PA-I-TO or SE-TO-I-JA). The number of words that have a <i>similar stem</i> to the Mycenaean ones is slightly higher, but at best, these comprise only about 30% of the putative Linear A toponyms (and even less of the known Mycenaean town-names).<br />
<br />
How can we reconcile this obvious problem? Well, there are three possible explanations, and later we shall see that all three does play a definite role in explaining the discrepancies between Linear A and B. First of all, the languages of the two scripts are clearly different: the Linear A tablets record a not-yet-well-understood extinct Aegean language termed Minoan, while the language of Linear B materials is an archaic version of Greek. Here comes the next difference: Between the last Linear A tablets, and the earliest Linear B tablets at Knossos, there is a time gap of at least 150 years! There is ample evidence of wars, bloodshed and towns being completely destroyed during this 'undocumented' period, that led to the establishment of the Mycenaean kingdom of Crete, with the capital of Knossos. Thus the settlement structure might not have been the same around 1300 BC as several hundred years before. There is also a third problem, namely that most of the known Linear A tablets (roughly half of the corpus) were found at Haghia Triada - that is, at the Phaistos polity, while the overwhelming majority of Linear B tablets come from Knossos. The tendency of the Cretan Linear B tablets to prominently feature places close to Knossos was already noted by researchers in the 1960s. But Haghia Triada is next to Phaistos and nowhere near Knossos, hence we would expect those places to be featured, that were important for Phaistos, not those in the vicinity of Knossos.<br />
<br />
Still, with all these possible explanations, a lingering sense of discomfort remains: Was the identification of these Linear A terms as place-names correct? Or these were just some randomly selected words from obscure lists? How can we ascertain our identifications, if we cannot find these names on the Linear B tablets?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xqEF1JuSrKE/Tb2DdvBytBI/AAAAAAAAAj4/-MNMzRUMC88/s1600/Haghia-Triada-tablet-13.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="201" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-xqEF1JuSrKE/Tb2DdvBytBI/AAAAAAAAAj4/-MNMzRUMC88/s320/Haghia-Triada-tablet-13.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
The proof that the previously listed terms in fact very nicely correspond to Cretan localties comes from an unexpected source. We shall take a closer look at the Haghia Triada tablet no. 13 (see figure). In fact this is the most <a href="http://www.ancientscripts.com/lineara.html">commonly shown</a> tablet in books, because of its nice shape, clarity and readibility. Now we shall read - and interpret - it, word by word. The first sign-group of the header: KA-U-DE-TA is the most obscure term of the tablet. It could either be a name of a <i>month</i> (as common in Linear B headers referring to collection of taxes), or some <i>broader geographic term</i> (more on this later). It is followed by the logogram of <i>wine</i>. The text term, TE is an (abbreviated) transaction term, quite common on Linear A tablets. It probably translates as <i>give(s)</i>, <i>pay(s)</i> or <i>payment</i>. Thereafter come six names (with numbers), all pertaining to places.<br />
<br />
There is only a single name that can be immediately identified with an extant town. On the fourth entry of the tablet, <b>KU-DO-NI</b> is the same as modern <i>Khania</i>, classic <i>Kydonia</i> (Lin. B KU-DO-NI-JA). The immediately preceding third entry, <b>TE-KI</b> recalls the name of another Cretan town from the classic era: <i>Tegea</i> - which once stood on Western Crete, in the vicinity of modern <i>Kissamos</i>. These two locations do not even fall far from each other.<br />
<br />
The second entry is a bit more elusive: <b>TE-TU</b> resembles the name of the classical <i>Tityros peninsula</i>, modern <i>Cape Rodopou</i>. Not far from Khania, the place is completely uninhabited today. But from ancient authors, we know that a town once stood there. It was commonly referred to as <i>Diktynnaion</i> - being a principal site of worship to goddess Britomartis. The very first entry: <b>RE-ZA</b> looks like a Minoan rendering of the name of ancient <i>Lissos</i>, whose ruins are found near modern <i>Sougia</i>, a bit southwards from the other three locations. Up to date, no Minoan towns were identified in that area, but in the light of this identification, it might be a site worthwhile to examine.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xW0NTlOlvCs/Tb2Dg5TtiDI/AAAAAAAAAj8/VzV0GkJVcsE/s1600/Haghia-Triada-13-locations.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="179" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xW0NTlOlvCs/Tb2Dg5TtiDI/AAAAAAAAAj8/VzV0GkJVcsE/s320/Haghia-Triada-13-locations.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
The sixth entry refers to <b>I-DU-NE-SI</b>, with all likelyhood, a minute entity: Its contributions in wine are negligible, and the name never recurs on any other tablet. Hence we may never learn where it lies. Unlike this hapax, the name in the fifth entry: <b>DA-SI-*118</b> is found on many other tablets at Haghia Triada. Although the name does not obviously resemble any modern town or geographical entity on Crete, it closely corresponds to a Linear B toponym: DA-*83-JA. The Linear B sign *83 looks almost the same as Linear A *118, hinting at their identity. Since the distribution of vowels in the surrounding syllables strongly suggests that it was an I-series sign, I <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/01/solution-for-problem-evolution-of.html">tentatively assigned</a> *118 / *83 the value <b>ZI</b>. Keep in mind that the Z-series probably represented affricates (<i>*ts</i>, thus ME-ZA-NA near Pylos = <i>*Metsana</i>, later <i>Messene</i>); this phonetic value could very nicely explain the discordance of the Linear A and Linear B forms (<i>*Dasitsi</i>→<i>*Dastsi</i>→<i>*Datsiya</i>). Unfortunately, DA-ZI-JA only rarely co-occurs with other place-names in Linear B texts (the only example is F670, where RU-KI-TO and O-NA-JO are also mentioned). This does not enable us to localize it: it could have been anywhere in the area from Rethymno to Arkalochori. The only thing we know is that it was a settlement of reasonably large size and importance.<br />
<br />
The close proximity of the places identifiable on HT13 (see map) is astonishing. All the semi-regular phonetic and grammatic correspondences (i.e. <i>*e</i> vowels frequently changed over to <i>*i</i>, Minoan words ending in <i>*-e</i> / <i>*-i</i> receiving <i>*-ya</i> endings in Greek, <i>-ZA</i> endings corresponding to the famous Pre-Greek <i>-ssos</i> ones, etc.) also hint at the correctness of reading. This is simply too good to be true! Are indedeed <i>all</i> the previously collected terms places? And can they really be identified on today's greatly changed Cretan landscape? This is a highly exciting topic, and I look forward to continue our exploration in my next post.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-52814318263912689222011-04-22T16:00:00.000-07:002011-04-23T02:03:36.758-07:00Gleaning Cretan place-names from Linear A tabletsAfter a lengthy absence, I have returned once again to share you some novel pieces of research. About four months ago, I started am ambitious project aimed at classifying most of the terms, especially names occurring in the Linear A corpus. My chief aim was to separate place-names from personal names and (at least approximately) annotate most of the words. But how could one determine the meaning of the Minoan terms by any certainty, given the small size (less than a thousand complete words) of the corpus? <br />
<br />
Fortunately, the tablets themselves offer the key. The enduring scribal tradition, that also dictated the form of Linear B tablets, had born centuries earlier: despite being in a different language, and much more compressed, Linear A tablets were built around essentially the same principles as their late Linear B children. Most of the tablets record items - typically agricultural goods - collected as tax, marked by the name of their donors. But there are other topics as well: Just like in Linear B, certain Linear A tablets record the workforce at the disposal of the kingdom. These people-listing tablets come in three main varieties. Some of them list people by their place of origin, containing city-names as entries. Others list people by their gender, age or profession. And, last but not least, some Knossos Linear B tablets count people individually, by name.<br />
<br />
It is relatively easy to pin-point toponyms in Linear B texts - even if the people mentioned have more than one qualifier - because of the very characteristic Greek adjectives in -JO or -JA or the dedicated allative (-DE) and locative cases. The numbers and other terms can also help to identify the listing principles: If the commodity is 'VIR' (men) and all numerals are '1', then the terms listed at each entry are most commonly personal names. If the tablet lists multiple 'VIR' per entry, then the terms are most commonly place-names. In some rare cases, there are higher than one 'VIR' quantities listed besides terms that describe professions, rather than places; in the latter case, terms are frequently ligatured or abbreviated.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-KDJXE-hKFRo/TbIBzIoVs9I/AAAAAAAAAjs/JNXPt2YIuTA/s1600/LinA-placenames-01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="261" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-KDJXE-hKFRo/TbIBzIoVs9I/AAAAAAAAAjs/JNXPt2YIuTA/s320/LinA-placenames-01.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
Although Linear A tablets are much shorter, typically containing single-term entries in all contexts (on tablets dealing with taxes or payments as well as those assessing the workforce available), we can still use the above principles to identify their precise context. Most improtantly, we can identify a number of tablets with multiple 'VIR' entries, counting more than one human subject/term. It is utterly tempting to believe that at least some of these tablets deal with <i>places of provenience</i>. If we would be able to distinguish which ones, we would be able to draw a map of Minoan Crete!<br />
<br />
My first table shows expressions that appear to be place-names, using the principle above. Interestingly, some of these terms also admit a nice interpretation as places, when compared with known Linear B toponyms. Examples include city names like PA-I-TO = <i>Phaistos</i> or KU-DO-NI = <i>Kydonia / Khania</i> (KU-DO-NI-JA in Lin B).<br />
<br />
There is still one powerful tool to identify the meaning of entries on the Cretan clay tablets: this is <i>overall context</i>. Since most of the tablets are just simple lists, if we can ascertain the meaning of neighbouring entries, we can also have a good guess at those not yet identified. Thus if we identified some terms as place-names on a tablet dealing with taxes or workforce, there would be a very good chance, that the remaining, unidentified entries are also toponyms - and not personal names or profession-groups.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-idkV5mPHziM/TbICRYjEonI/AAAAAAAAAjw/wjX6aadM0po/s1600/LinA-placenames-02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-idkV5mPHziM/TbICRYjEonI/AAAAAAAAAjw/wjX6aadM0po/s320/LinA-placenames-02.jpg" width="171" /></a></div><br />
In my next collection, I listed the terms (names) that co-occur with those on Table #1. Unfortunately, I had to ommit many "absolute hapaxes" (single names with unique form, without any recognizable similarity to others), otherwise the table would have been too long. I also intentionally left out three further terms (KA-PA, KA-RU and A-KA-RU). These have the nasty tendency of frequntly occupying the initial position of tablet-headers, thus they are very likely transaction terms, not proper places. The remaining list still contains plenty of intriguing terms - many of them showing semi-regular variations (declensional forms?), that might be interpreted as case endings (locatives, elatives, allatives) or adjectives (ethnics). <br />
<br />
One might have noticed, that most of my examples come from the Haghia Triada archive. That is because the fragmentary nature of most other archives does not enable us to conduct true contextual analyses. In absence of any other clue, we may still identify some toponyms, merely by comparing them to Linear B or Classic Era place-names known from Crete. On my last table, the the results of such a comparison are listed (only those terms are displayed, that have not been mentioned on previous lists).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qN6oOsrn2-4/TbICW5BeGMI/AAAAAAAAAj0/H8b_yvPaLdU/s1600/LinA-placenames-03.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="250" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qN6oOsrn2-4/TbICW5BeGMI/AAAAAAAAAj0/H8b_yvPaLdU/s320/LinA-placenames-03.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
Although the last list is the least reliable, it does feature most of the terms we would <i>expect</i> to be featured: the names of the holy mountains, and (although tentatively), names of many large townships. What is surprising, though, is the meager overlap between Linear A and Linear B terms, and the fact that most identifiable place-names on the Haghia Triada tablets refer to <i>Western Cretan</i> localties. We shall look into these matters to a much greater depth in the following posts!Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-83988918920504692592010-12-05T08:30:00.000-08:002010-12-12T03:18:23.968-08:00The most peculiar Minoan sign ever seenI would like to present a short post here, on a rather petty, but nevertheless interesting topic. As I was conducting a rather fruitful discussion with <a href="http://minoan.deaditerranean.com/author/kiminoa/">Kim Raymoure</a> about the orgins of several Linear A and B signs, I realized that the evolution of Minoan signs is rarely discussed by professional scholars, and it is something that needs to be explored in detail. To make a tiny contribution, I will share some of my not-so-recent discoveries with you, that apparently no one has proposed or published before. So here goes a small discussion about Linear A sign *301, Hiero *46 and their images.<br />
<br />
It was several years ago, when - in an attempt to make sense of some Minoan seals - I stumbled upon a Hieroglyphic version of Lin A *301. It is an easy thing to identify (and has been known for at least a decade), because this sign is so peculiar, and characteristic to the Cretan scripts. A strange, heavily gnarled object, with a straight line piercing it on one end. <a href="http://dbas.sciant.unifi.it/chs.php">CHIC</a> (Olivier et al.) terms this sign (*46) as 'adze'. Initially, I also believed it to be some kind of a tool (hack, rake), but was unable to explain either its strangely-shaped "handle", or the thickness of its "upper part". Fortunately, the Hieroglyphic signs do give a clue about the object it depicts: In some cases, the sign also has a strange "rayed disc" under the main bulk. Although frequently ommitted, its consistent recurrence in Hieroglyphic texts show this detail clearly belongs to the sign itself, and not a ligature.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TPuyo04xNRI/AAAAAAAAAjQ/FGN-Y9f9_E8/s1600/Sign-301-riddle.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TPuyo04xNRI/AAAAAAAAAjQ/FGN-Y9f9_E8/s320/Sign-301-riddle.jpg" width="230" /></a></div><br />
The same is true to the Lin A *301, that it sometimes comes as a variant: *606 (*301 with an open circle below). In contrary to the opinion of Godart and his colleagues, this is <i>not</i> a ligature (*301+*311), either - because "sign *311" does never occur alone, and the composition is exactly the same as the "Hie *46 with disc" variant. We are left to conclude that this "disc" or "circle" is in fact a commonly-ommitted detail of the original image. In most cases, it is not connected to the main bulk, but if you drew a line to connect the two, then it may suddenly become clear what the sign depicts!<br />
<br />
To make a long story short, this is what you would get: a human figure, bending towards and grabbing a pole. From its pose, it could either be an acrobat (in a somersault) or a captive or a slave, chained to a pole, bending forward in a submissive pose. The "rayed disc" turns out to be his head! Now, this interpretation can nicely explain the thickness of the upper part as well: because this is a human torso. And the "handle" is gnarled, just because it represents legs. I shall also direct the attention of my readers to the fact that the Phaistos Disc also has a sign (Pha *04) that depicts a 'captive' or 'slave'. The only difference is, that in this instance, the man stands upright and his hands are tied behind him, and not in front. One could argue that the disc is always separated from the main bulk, so the man is "decapitated"; Yet I find the probability small, that Minoans would have depicted an image of 'gore', while none of the Old World's writing systems did anything similar (The Mayas, with their dreaded customs are naturally taken out of the equation). Although the shape of Hiero *46 does resemble the Egyptian <i>setep</i> (a ritual tool, used in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opening_of_the_mouth_ceremony">opening of mouth</a> ceremony, but not in everyday life), it does not match an adze well - not even the bronze-age variants, as far as I know (please, correct me if I am mistaken).<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TPuyIAj5QeI/AAAAAAAAAjM/mdLSmCf_5fg/s1600/Sign-301-anatomy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="209" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TPuyIAj5QeI/AAAAAAAAAjM/mdLSmCf_5fg/s320/Sign-301-anatomy.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
The phonetic value of this sign is equally problematic as its image. Although it does not have any clear, direct Linear B counterpart, the sign is relatively common in Linear A. Although much of its occurrences likely come from the same words and constructions repeated over-and-over, like A-TA-I-*301-WA-JA. Interestingly, in Hieroglyphics, many of its occurrences come from a single word, either: *46-*44 (*44 being the 'trowel'-sign, with unknown value). This does little to help us decipher its reading. From careful examination of the phonetic values of following signs, one could get to the conclusion that the most probable vowel-value of Lin A *301 is <i>u</i>. Because the only simple <i>Cu</i>-sign that has not been yet identified in Lin A / Lin B is ZU (and readings like <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2009/09/cracking-libation-formula-part-i.html">A-I-ZU</a> would indeed make sense) this value could be suggested from one point of view. On the other hand, sign Lin A *301 is often mirrored with a vertical axis, and it only takes a mere 90 degrees clockwise rotation from such an image to get a shape identical to the Linear B JO sign (*36) - not yet identified in Linear A. Yet the latter theory would contradict the fact that Lin A *301 is very often followed by signs beginning with <i>w-</i> (WA or U [=<i>*wu</i>]), where O-series signs seem to attract pure vowels (compare A-SU-PU-WA [ARKH2] with A-SI-SU-PO-A [KH9]). This leaves the reading of Lin A *301 unexplained as of now.<br />
<br />
Linear A *301 was also used as a stand-alone sign on the Haghia Triada tablets. It is so frequent (over 100 occurrances) that many scolars were tempted to read the sign as a logogram. But because of the given interpretation of its graphic image, I seriously doubt that Lin A *301 would have been used as a true logogram (i.e. the image of the object cited). In cases it was used for a commodity, it was very likely an abbreviation of the commodity's name, and not an actual pictorial description. Somehow, I doubt that they would have stored men in wooden boxes down the temple cellar. Or - if we stick with the original <i>adze</i>-theory - hundreds of the same tool, in one house...<br />
<br />
<u><b>Update</b>:</u> After doing some in-depth research on the cited Egyptian item, I found that it it was also called the <a href="http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/funerary_practices/index.html">Adze of Upuaut</a>. It was not just a ceremonial item, but supposedly a model of a real-life one. Seems like <a href="http://www.elderfaiths.org/wesir/adze.jpg">this tool</a> of ancient Egypt was dissimilar to the adzes of other ages and civilizations. Given the close interconnectedness of Minoan and Egyptian civilizations, it could explain the shape of both Hiero *46 and Lin A *301. If the "rayed circle" were to be interpreted as a pile of wood-chips, that could give a solution to our riddle.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-20978043827776123562010-11-16T13:30:00.000-08:002010-11-17T10:56:30.113-08:00Commodities on Linear A tablets - Part III am returning to a <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/01/commodities-on-linear-tablets-part-i.html">topic</a>, the continuation of which was long overdue. It is about the item-names featured on Linear A accounting tablets. In a previous post, I analysed a few tablets from Haghia Triada just to show that commodities can be featured both in a logogrammatic and textual form on the same tablet. Yet, in most cases, they do not mix.<br />
<br />
It appears that the Cretan scribes had special rules when it came to writing about items of trade. Whenever writing names, they tended to use as few ligatures as they could, writing out names either fully, or abbreviating them with their first syllable. However, when it came to the writing of commodities, they used ligatures as heavily as possible. They drew the picture of the more complicated items, and added syllabary signs to them (most likely abbreviations) detailing their qualities. Although we know very little of the Minoan language, therefore we cannot "read" these qualities, many Linear B parallels suggest that they must have been clear to a bronze-age Cretan scribe. For example (these are just random examples), PA+sheep could have meant 'old sheep' (παλαιός), PE+sheep+masc 'ram from the last year' (περυσινϝό), etc. in Mycenean accounting texts. The Knossos Linear B tablets are especially prone to use such abbreviations, compared to the much more verbose Pylos tablets.<br />
<br />
But sometimes the items are not drawn at all: their name is written out fully in ligatures of otherwise phonetic signs: This way, ME+RI stood for 'honey' (μέλι), KA+PO for 'fruit' (καρπός), KA+NA+KO meant 'saffron' (κνάκος), TU+RO2 'cheese' (τυρός) and A+RE+PA 'ointment' (αλειφά). This way of expression was especially useful for goods whose image would have been excessively hard to draw on a clay tablet. Most commonly, the ligatured signs denoting a commodity are to be read in a downwards-up direction, while the qualifiers are added beside the commodity logogram. But this rule is never strict: sometimes the size and appearence of the signs can dictate alternative arrangements. It should not be forgotten, too, that people could also be regarded as "items" on accounting tablets. Therefore the names of different types of men and women, professions, etc. can also be represented in ligatures in those cases.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cols="3" style="border: 2px ridge green;"><tbody>
<tr> <th colspan="3" style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle;">Tablet HT23 - Side A</th> </tr>
<tr> <th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 25%;"> Statement </th> <th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 50%;"> Item </th> <th style="border: 1px dotted green; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width: 25%;"> Quantity </th> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center">KA-NA • </td> <td align="center">CYP (barley?)</td> <td align="center">1/3</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">*308 (=?)</td> <td align="center">1/16</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">OLE+NE (oil type)</td> <td align="center">1/16</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">OLE+TU (oil type)</td> <td align="center">1/16</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">OLE+RI (oil type)</td> <td align="center">1/16</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">*550 (RA+JA+RU?)</td> <td align="center">1/16</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">VINa (wine)</td> <td align="center">10</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">*508 (QA+TA+RE?)</td> <td align="center">10</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">*509 (QA+TA+RE+PU?)</td> <td align="center">10</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">E (=?)</td> <td align="center">17</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">QI-RI-TU-QA</td> <td align="center">1/16</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">SA-SA-ME</td> <td align="center">1/16</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">*530 (ME+SI)</td> <td align="center">10</td> </tr>
<tr> <td align="center"></td> <td align="center">KO-RU</td> <td align="center">1</td> </tr>
</tbody> </table><br />
To represent all three ways of writing commodities on a single tablet, take a look at tablet HT 23 (shown above). The header KA-NA is reminiscent of the term U-NA-KA-NA-SI seen on the libation tables in various forms, and likely means 'gift' or 'offering'. This view is reinforced by the rather small quantities of various goods mentioned on this tablet. The commodities themselves appear to be exclusively agricultural products - yet quite a specialized assortment. Unfortunately, we cannot plausibly decipher most of the rare ligatures, like *550 (RA+JA+RU?) or *508 (QA+TA+RE?). But the term SA-SA-ME is almost certainly <i>sesame seed</i> (σησάμη, SA-SA-MA in Linear B), thus QI-RI-TU-QA must also denote another type of seasoning plant or spice - as suggested by the comparably small quantities of both goods. The term KO-RU also reminds us of <i>coriander</i>, written as KO-RI-JA-DA-NA (κορίαδνα) on Linear B tablets. This assembly of goods somewhat resembles the ingredients traditionally used to prepare κυκεών, an ancient Greek beverage frequently drunk on religious feasts.<br />
<br />
The cited tablet is one of the luckier finds, where we at least stand a chance of identifying some of the referenced goods. Many other tablets are hopelessly haunted by the fact that we do not know the names Minoans used for their objects of everyday life. For example, we can at least suspect that the term MA+RU [HT 24] actually stands for <i>wool</i>, as Linear B also used almost exactly the same sign to denote wool (probably a lingature for the Minoan word denoting 'wool' - related to the Classic Greek term μαλλός). But frankly, I have no idea of the meaning of terms like ME+SI(+KI) or KA+JA, appearing on the very same tablet HT 24. For the purpose of nothing more than a teaser, I collected a nice assortment of item-names in pure ligatures. You can see them on the table below:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TOL1llyl_SI/AAAAAAAAAiw/HTu225nofV4/s1600/Selected-ligatures.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TOL1llyl_SI/AAAAAAAAAiw/HTu225nofV4/s320/Selected-ligatures.jpg" width="220" /></a></div><br />
Last but not least, there is a very important class of items I did not mention until this point. As in Linear B, some Linear A tablets also mention vases, clay or metal vessels as items of trade. While the terms mentioned in Linear B remind us of Classic Greek (e.g. A-PO-RE-WE = αμφορήϝες, TI-RI-PO-DE = τρίποδες), the Linear A terms are more mysterious. They only admit a clear interpretation in a limited number of cases. Such a single case is tablet HT 38, where the phrase DA-RO-PA (*<i>talopa</i> or *<i>talúpa</i>) recalls both Greek <i>τολύπη</i> = 'lump of clay' and Hittite <i>taluppa</i> = 'clay'. The reading is quite plausible, as it is followed by the image of a chalice - supposedly made of clay. On the same tablet, a different item has the name A+KA, that reminds us of Greek ασκός = 'wine-skin', made either of pumpkins, leather or clay. Another tablet [HT39] also presents image of an <i>askos</i>-like vessel with a sign 'A' written on it.<br />
<br />
Sadly, this ease of reading does not apply to tablet <a href="http://people.ku.edu/%7Ejyounger/LinearA/HT_31_Sm.jpg">HT31</a> - one of the most spectacular Linear A accouting tablets. It not only lists different vessel types, but also adds terms to each image (logogram). For example, a conical cup carries the term QA-PA3, a handled krater goes by the name KA-RO-PA3 and a pithoid amphore is labelled SU-PU. Not a single term is easy to interpret, not even SU-PA3-RA and PA-TA-QE that denote simple, mundane vases. Apart from the faint similarity between PA-TA-QE and the Greco-Roman <i>patera</i> (open dish) or <i>patané</i> (pan), there is no plausible explanation based on Mycenean Greek. This is quite surprising, as many vessel names are "technical wanderworts" that are notoriously easily and commonly borrowed from one language to another. For example, the English words <i>vase</i>, <i>urn</i>, <i>chalice</i>, <i>cup</i>, <i>pan</i> and <i>jar</i> all go back to Latin <i>vasa</i>, <i>urna</i>, <i>calix</i>, <i>cupa</i>, Greek <i>patané</i> and Arabic <i>jarrah</i>. Even in Mycenean Greek, A-PO-RE-WE (amphores) and TI-RI-PO-DE (tripods) and U-DO-RO (hydroi) were authentic Greek in origin, but several other terms were clearly not, such as DI-PA (depas) or KU-RU-SU-PA3 (probably pronounced as *<i>khrusupha</i>). <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TOL13oNnDiI/AAAAAAAAAi0/y8rqIm2g0aw/s1600/Minoan-vessel-types.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TOL13oNnDiI/AAAAAAAAAi0/y8rqIm2g0aw/s320/Minoan-vessel-types.jpg" width="232" /></a></div><br />
In the light of this fact, it is strange to see that almost none of the non-Indo-European Greek vessel names are found in the Linear A corpus. On the other hand, the names SU-PU and SU-PA3-RA show some resemblance to the Semitic stem *<i>spl</i>- = 'cup', 'vessel' (c.f. Biblical ספל, <i>sepel</i>). If this observation is not just random coincidence, it is possible that we are dealing with a loanword from the Middle East. Borrowing of agricultural terms, plant names as well as technical terms from the more civilized areas of the ancient world is proven in quite a large number of cases (e.g. in most European languages, the word for the metal 'copper' might have come from the Sumerian term <i>kubar</i>, 'bronze', mediated through the Aegean), so a Semitic loan would not be suprising at all. The only mystery that remains: why did the Greeks not take <i>any</i> of these terms over?<br />
<br />
Apart from the pure chance of all names gone lost, there is also a possiblility that we are dealing not exactly with vessel-names, but rather, the description of their <i>properties</i> (e.g. earthen or metal, painted or bare, with or without glaze, etc.). At least some vessel-types clearly have descriptors referring to their material, volume, contents, or other qualities, instead of type. This is also suggested by the similarity of SU-PA3-RA (*<i>suphara</i>? *<i>suppala</i>?) to Hittite stem <i>suppai-</i> = 'pure', 'brilliant', 'sacred' (Hittite <i>suppiahh-</i> = 'to (ritually) purify', also <i>suppistuwara-</i> = 'ornamented' (e.g. cup), even the supposedly Minoan s3-b-w-j-7-3-jj-<u>d</u>3-3 ='may it purge' found in one of the famous <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/02/minoan-incantations-on-egyptian-papyri.html">Keftiu-incantations</a>). Or the resemblance of KA-RO-PA3 (*<i>kalopha</i>? *<i>kalúppa</i>?) to Greek <i>καλυπτώ</i> 'to cover' (Greek <i>καλυβή</i> = 'cover', 'shelter', Greek <i>κέλυφος</i> = 'sheath', 'case' or Hittite <i>kaluppa-</i> = 'undergarment', 'petticoat') - although these are definitely not the most convincing parallels I have ever seen. Much more research is needed before we can tell with any certainty what these terms might mean.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-17196907427127993712010-11-01T09:49:00.000-07:002010-11-01T10:37:09.014-07:00Major graphic overhaulI decided to update my little blog's minimalistic appearence. I am still experimenting with the new template and its look: so if anything looks out of bounds or does not display correctly, just grab the 'comments' button, and give some feedback!<br />
<br />
In the meantime, I was also preparing my future posts. Some of the titles planned for the near future: "<i>Commodities on Linear A tablets, part II</i>", "<i>Classifying the names on the Haghia Triada Tablets</i>", "<i>What does Linear A tell us about Cretan geography?</i>" and "<i>Anatolian loans in Minoan</i>". Stay tuned!Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-71557966904551439862010-10-17T14:00:00.000-07:002012-10-01T16:31:08.989-07:00Tracking the evolution of the 'KA' and 'QE' signs of Minoan Hieroglyphic and Linear scriptsI am returning to the more technical problems surrounding the Minoan scripts. What I intend to do at this occasion is, to show you how the signs of the Minoan writing systems can be traced from its origins until the very end of Linear Minoan scripts. Finding the Hieroglyphic counterpart of a Linear A sign is not the simplest business. Anyone who ever tried to read a Minoan Hieroglyphic inscription can testify this. I will try out a new method today: one employing the symmetry-based classification of signs. We shall see it later, that this reductionalist approach is in fact quite useful. The case of two Linear A and B signs: KA (Lin AB *77) and QE (Lin AB *78) will nicely illustrate the way Linear A signs can be traced back to Hieroglyphics - and also the problems associated with this approach. <br />
<br />
The Linear AB sign KA has long been noted for its similarity to a wheel in its shape (for example, see the <a href="http://www.hethport.uni-wuerzburg.de/luwglyph/Signlist.pdf">Anatolian hieroglyph</a> Ana *292 for 'wheel' - with the phonetic value <i>hari</i>). Its Minoan value also seemed similar to the Luwian word 'to rotate' (<i>kalutiya</i>). Yet there was a major problem with this approach: despite the considerably high frequency of KA signs seen in Linear A documents (among the five most common phonetic signs on the Haghia Triada tablets), no one was ever able to discern even a single wheel-like Hieroglyphic figure. So this is where the original theory fails: whatever object the Minoan KA sign depicts, is definitely not a wheel.<br />
<br />
How can we solve this problem? If - disregarding the actual object - we only sought for signs that have a <i>similar symmetry</i> (i.e. at least two mirror axes), we may get six signs as a result. These are shown on the table below. Apart from a fair collection of "rectangular" signs (*39, *63, *65, *66), that could never have evolved into the circular QE or KA syllabograms, we get two good hits: One of them is a simple circle (Hie *73) - either open or filled. This one is fairly rare (CHIC230, MA113, MA119, MA120, KN69), but likely a phonetic sign. Since it co-occurs with the 'sieve' sign Hie *47 on MA113, it is clearly not a mere variant of the latter (more about it later). The next one is the very common 'cross pommée' (Hie *70) sign. Although the 'cross' sign is closer to the Linear A KA sign than any other of the above ones, we have to keep in mind, that KA and QE are not the only Linear A signs of this high symmetry. In fact, there are no less than nine phonetic signs in Linear A and B, that can have more than one symmetry axes. Some of them even have rotational symmetries. The syllabogram RO (Lin AB *02) also admits multiple mirror axes, and matches the 'cross' sign in shape almost perfectly. Unlike all the other signs of the o-series, RO is also reasonably common in Linear A (within the top five on the Haghia Triada tablets). So it is certainly not a bad match for the Hiero 'cross pommée' (Hie *70).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TLm6uVLDYZI/AAAAAAAAAhI/OedkJE_Md5Y/s1600/High-symmetry-Minoan-signs.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TLm6uVLDYZI/AAAAAAAAAhI/OedkJE_Md5Y/s320/High-symmetry-Minoan-signs.jpg" width="189" /></a></div>
<br />
Once we made the identification above, the values of the remaining signs are constrained. The problem of assignments is this: there is only <i>one</i> valid solution. If you made an error early on, it is often only realized in the end: namely, you will have signs that you were unable to assign at all. For this very purpose, I do not attempt the <i>full</i> asignment of Linear A signs to Hiero ones. All I try to do is find the best matches first, thereby minimalizing the chance of an early mismatch, and the collapse of the entire attempt.<br />
<br />
Since we had nine signs identified in Linear A or B with multiple symmetry axes (RO, PA, *47, NU, PA3, JA, KA, QE, SWI), and we found only six appropriate matches among Hieroglyphics, we clearly need some intuition. We know from the evolution of several writing systems that signs frequently increase their symmetry class (i.e. they become more symmetric) as time passes. This stems from the all-permeating human tendency of regularizing things around us. The reverse can also happen: this is how the round Linear A KA sign "opened up" in <a href="http://sites.google.com/site/collesseum/cyprusscripts">Cypro-Minoan</a> and became the arrow-like Cypriot KA sign. Given these tendencies, any sign that had only a single axis of symmetry, could have easily evolved into one with multiple axes. In the context of Hieroglyphics, there is a sign that could actually well match both KA and QE if we allowed a graphic reduction: this is the already-mentioned 'sieve' (Hie *47) sign. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TLm7HKEeR6I/AAAAAAAAAhM/UMyNjulXVNg/s1600/KA-QE-sign-evolution.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="143" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TLm7HKEeR6I/AAAAAAAAAhM/UMyNjulXVNg/s320/KA-QE-sign-evolution.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Is the 'sieve' sign (Hie *47) KA or rather QE? Alone from its shape, it is impossible to decide. However, we do have a powerful help on our hand: the pictogram-like syllabary of the Phaistos Disc. Although different from the traditional Hieroglyphics, the disc does present us one clearly discernible 'cake'-like sign (Pha *12). While matching with Lin A QE almost perfectly in shape, it is clearly not a sieve. On the other hand, the disc also has another sign (Pha *17), that looks like a Rugby-ball with handles. That is exactly how a (handled) sieve would look if we viewed it from aside. From this point on, the identifications KA = 'sieve' and QE = 'cake' are rather straightforward. As I mentioned early in this post, there is also a somewhat cake-like 'full circle' sign in Minoan Hieroglyphics (Hie *73). It is much rarer than the 'sieve' sign, but the QE sign is also much rarer in Linear A, than the KA one (30 vs. 117 occurrances on the HT tablets). This last note essentially closes the circle. Or at least so I hope.<br />
<br />
For those who still disbelieve these identifications, I suggest to read (or rather, parse through) the Linear A tablet <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/01/commodities-on-linear-tablets-part-i.html">HT6</a>. It is the only case where sign QE is used as a logogram: and from the context of the tablet, it must refer to some foodstuff. Given that it stands alongside the term PI-TA (<i>pita</i> = Aramaic for 'bread'), I strongly feel that the 'cake'-sign actually meant 'bread'. It should not be forgotten that there exists a sign (Ana *181) within Anatolian Hieroglyphics that looks similar to the Linear A QE sign and the same as Phaistos Disc sign *12. It is actually the Luwian logogram for 'bread'!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TL9MM3z7a2I/AAAAAAAAAhU/QPexZcyUf9k/s1600/PU-RE-KA-NA-seal.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="228" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TL9MM3z7a2I/AAAAAAAAAhU/QPexZcyUf9k/s320/PU-RE-KA-NA-seal.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
If we add our newly-gained insight to our <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/02/how-to-read-minoan-hieroglyphics.html">previous knowledge</a>, we are now able to read further Hieroglyphic documents. The Hieroglyphic seal (CHIC No. 166) I show above, will be our next objective. The reading of the signs is very likely PU-RE-KA-NA, and this seems to be a Minoan proper name (probably <i>*Pulekna</i>).<br />
<br />
Thoughts, notes, additions? If you can offer an alternative assignment of the cited signs, feel free to share it, I would love to see it, to either confirm or contest the one I showed you here!<br />
<br />
<u><b>Update:</b></u> The theory presented here is slightly outdated, since now several instances show that Hie *77 reads as KA more plausibly than Hie *47. Hie *73 is prossibly not a syllabogram at all, but a numeral (100). This does not mean that Hie *47 cannot be read meaningfully as QE. PU-RE-QE-NA also appears to be a plausible reading for this name (toponym? <i>?=Polychna?</i>). Also, Pha *12 might read as KA (yielding the particle I-KA- in word-initial positions).Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-50142798609000399032010-09-29T13:10:00.000-07:002010-10-01T10:35:43.798-07:00Goddess Eileithyia and her snakesMy next post is going to be a shorther one, without that heavy linguistics stuff - if possible. All I intend to put together are a few facts about the names and attributes of some Minoan divinities, and the way their cult survived into the classical era.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TKObCVrUWPI/AAAAAAAAAg4/Zc5NdwKHK1M/s1600/Minoan-Eileithyia.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="268" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TKObCVrUWPI/AAAAAAAAAg4/Zc5NdwKHK1M/s320/Minoan-Eileithyia.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<b>Eileithyia</b> - the goddess of childbirth and labour - is perhaps the best known Greek goddess of certainly Minoan origin. <a href="http://www.theoi.com/Cult/EileithyiaCult.html">Her cult</a> was quite widespread in the classical Hellas, with temples found in all the major cities of Greece: Athens, Megara, Korinthos, Argos, Mycenae, Sparta, Olympia etc. But her most holy sanctuary was a sacred cave near Amnissos. This tradition is quite unusual when compared to other divinities, and undoubtedly a continuation of the Minoan cave-sanctuaries. A high number of similar underground sanctuaries existed on Crete in the classical period: such as the Dictaian (Psychro) cave or the cave of Mount Ida (Psiloritis). Though these likely served other deities as well (e.g. <i>Rhea</i>), some subterranean sites are known to be associated exclusively with Eileithyia: such as the cave of Inatos. It seems that the Minoans firmly associated caves with childbirth, so divinities with the appropriate portfolio were primarily worshipped there. Some of these goddesses might have possessed healing abilities as well, judged by bronze leg and the human figurines found in the Diktaian and the Idaian caves. Both of the latter caves were famed as being the alleged birthplace of <i>Zeus</i>, thus also associated with his mother, <i>Rhea</i>. If we believe the <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/02/minoan-incantations-on-egyptian-papyri.html">Egyptians</a>, <i>Raziya</i> (=classical <i>Rhea</i>) was also associated with healing, alongside with the mountain-goddess <i>Amaya</i> (=classical <i>Maia</i>). <br />
<br />
The 2nd century AD author Pausanias gives us a description of the cult of Eileithyia at Mount Kronios, Olympia. From him, we know that the priestesses of Eilyeithyia had to live in chastity, as virgins - an interesting association with the goddess of childbith. The main gifts offered to the deity were honey-cakes and incense - reminiscent of the gifts customary in the Mycenean era, as recorded by the Knossos Linear B tablets. Pausanias also relates a story about how a woman appeared before the army of Arkadians, holding a child in her hands. But as soon as she placed the child onto the ground, he changed into a terrifying snake, chasing the entire hostile army away. Then it simply burrowed into the ground and disappeared. That was the story explaining the foundation of this sanctuary of Eileithyia and her child (titled <i>Sosipolis</i>, saviour of the of the city). <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TKObCmJvrtI/AAAAAAAAAg8/Ai89dvcm57M/s1600/Cretan-caves.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TKObCmJvrtI/AAAAAAAAAg8/Ai89dvcm57M/s320/Cretan-caves.jpg" width="303" /></a></div><br />
The latter tale also points to an interesting thing: somehow Eileithyia was also associated with snakes. This is when Minoan figurines depicting a goddess with prominent breasts, holding two snakes into the air come to the mind. It seems to be a genuinely Minoan concept, to associate snakes with childbirth. Although in Classical Greece, snakes were associated with life-force, even with healing (e.g. as the attribute of Asclepios), but not with procreation. To understand this strange Cretan association, we have to know a bit more of the snakes themselves!<br />
<br />
For quite some time, snakes were identified as a chtonic symbol in Minoan iconography. For example, the female figurines with the characteristic triad of animals: snakes, cats and doves are thought to sybolize the goddess' omnipotence over three domains (<i>underworld + earth + heavens</i>). But this is not the only explanation, and not the best explanation of the association of a snake with a newborn child. I do not know how many of you are a fan of zoology, to know: many snake-species, like addlers, are fairly unique among reptiles with the ability of being <i>viviparious</i>. That is, they do not lay their eggs, but give birth to new little snakes after a certain gestation period - much like us, mammals. Members of the family <i>Viperidae</i> (the addlers), that show such characteristics, are among the most common snakes in the Mediterranean. Thus anyone who had noticed their viviparity could have made an association between snake reproduction and the human one. The argument is tempting, but there is a slight problem: The most famous snake-symbol of Greece: the staff of Asclepios (and perhaps the Caduceus, the staff of Hermes, too) depicts the non-poisonous Colubrid snake <i>Elaphe longissima</i>, which is actually oviparous. This makes me rethink the theory.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TKObClN6fQI/AAAAAAAAAhA/FRgMwrlNbjk/s1600/Snake-symbols.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="284" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TKObClN6fQI/AAAAAAAAAhA/FRgMwrlNbjk/s320/Snake-symbols.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
Now let us turn our attention to the origins of the name Eileithyia. It has been long suggested because of the characteristics of her cult, that the worship of the goddess is of Minoan origin. Fortunately enough, the Linear A and B tablets enable us to reconstruct the full evolution of her name. The earliest record of the cult of Eileithyia is the Linear A tablet <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/05/divine-names-on-linear-tablets.html">KH5</a>. The goddess is named there as A-RA-U-DA (<i>*Alauta</i>), and worshipped at WI-NA-DU (<i>*Winatu</i> = <i>Inatos</i>) directly corresponding to the goddess E-RE-U-TI-JA (<i>*Eleutia</i>) mentioned on the Linear B tablets from Knossos. From the Mycenean name, the classic Greek terms <i>Eileithyia</i>, <i>Eleithya</i>, <i>Eiléthyia</i>, <i>Eleuthya</i> (Ionic) , <i>Eleusia</i> (Laconian doric), <i>Eleiuthya</i> (Cretan doric), and <i>Eileitheia</i> (Northwestern Greek) were born - from one of them comes Latin <i>Ilithia</i>. The origin of the name seems to be Indo-European: The name <b>Alauta</b> does match with the PIE stem <i>*h1leudh-</i> = 'free': the same stem that underlies Greek <i>eleutheros</i> = 'free', Latin <i>liber</i> = 'free', German <i>Leute</i>, literally 'free people', even the non-IE Etruscan <i>lautni</i> = 'freedman'. As I <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/09/elegant-explanation-for-lack-of-r-l.html">expressed</a> it before, the theonym is likely a loan-word from an unspecified Anatolian language (not necessarily Luwian - many of the Anatolian-Minoan borrowings seem to <i>predate</i> the diffusion of Luwian dialects onto the Aegean shore). That explains the first step of evolution: <i>*H1(e)leudh-a</i> to <i>Alauta</i>. While the Myceneans barely changed the name of the goddess they took the cult over of, It is not the easiest to explain the later Greek variants. While the lengthening of -e- poses no problem (remember: -ει- is not necessarily <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spurious_diphthong">diphtongal</a>!), the methathesis of -υθ- to -θυ- is more problematic. Also, do not forget the addition of aspiration, as a novelty. I think the best explanation is a re-analysis of the stem by later Greeks, and its contamination with the Greek word ἐλεύθερος and its hypothetic ancient verbal form *ἐλευθώ, explaining an evolution <i>Alauta</i> → <i>Eleutia</i> → <i>*Eleuthwia</i> → <i>*Elethuia</i> → <i>Eileithyia</i>. The funny thing is that the Greek re-analysis was mostly correct: they added aspiration back to a stem that originally possessed it in PIE.<br />
<br />
I would also like to use the current post to debunk some incorrect hypotheses regarding the Minoan divinities. From time-to-time I have seen mentions of an alleged Linear A term, KU-PA3-PA3. Some sought to identify this term with the Lycian goddess <i>Cybele</i>. But the sad truth is, the cited word was only found on a single Linear A tablet, HT88. Recently, <a href="http://minoan.deaditerranean.com/">Kiminoa</a> (who also maintains a neat blog on Linear A) helped me to clarify that KU-PA3-PA3 on HT88 is a <i>misreading</i>, for the correct word is KU-PA3-NU, a place-name (perhaps related to <i>Cyrba</i> = Hierapetra) frequently mentioned on other Haghia Triada tablets as well. So better dismiss the hypothesis that Cybele was a Minoan goddess. It does not fit the (Minoan-inspired) Greek mythology, either. It is much more plausible to believe that the position of 'overmother' was held by a familar figure: <i>Rhea</i>, and not some obscure Anatolian divinity otherwise unknown to the marority of the Greek word.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-22527914380927211982010-09-12T08:45:00.001-07:002010-09-19T17:18:07.642-07:00An elegant explanation for the lack of R-L distinction in Linear A and BI am now going back to one of the problems that have long plagued the research on ancient Aegean languages: namely, the baffling <b>lack of r/l distinction</b> in all Minoan writing systems. The only exception, Cypriot, was born outside Crete. Although I initially proposed the possibility that the Minoan language inherently lacked <i>r/l</i> distinction, like Egyptian (as some extant languages, e.g. Japanese also do), the sheer number of Minoan loan-words present in Greek, with good examples for both <i>r</i> (e.g. <i>Rhethymnon</i>, <i>Rhadamanthys</i>, <i>Rhea</i>) and <i>l</i> (<i>Lyktos</i>, <i>lyre</i>, <i>lily</i>, etc.) sounds, have shaken my theory. All other Aegean-born languages, such as Etruscan or Eteocypriot do have both <i>l</i> and <i>r</i>, and so do all Anatolian languages. Also, <a href="http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Eteocretan/Eteocretan.html">Eteocretan</a> - a likely descendant of Minoan - apparently did possess both laterals (e.g. <i>isalabre</i>, <i>*isal-awr-e</i> [goat-cheese]) and trills (e.g. the common word <i>irer</i>). This is not consistent with my original theory, so I gradually decided to give it up entirely.<br /><br />Recently, while I was collecting material and doing research for my future posts, a brilliant new idea came to my mind. In all Anatolian tongues, a word-initial <i>r-</i> never happens (it is forbidden), thus there are no initial <i>Rv</i>-type syllables either. What if Minoan was similar in that regard? All Minoan writing systems are believed to be largely acrophonic, right? Now what if a particular sound is forbidden in initial positions? That is where you need a work-around to the situation. The Cretan solution: without giving up the acrophonic character of the script, use the <i>L</i>-series signs as a substitution for <i>Rv</i> type syllables! Really simple, no?<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TJYefET8mNI/AAAAAAAAAfk/mUxgtL6MdBE/s1600/Post-Minoan-languages.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 180px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TJYefET8mNI/AAAAAAAAAfk/mUxgtL6MdBE/s320/Post-Minoan-languages.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5518631912471304402" /></a><br />Before going into details, we should return to the Egyptian script once more. Many experts of Egyptian linguistic history would immediately quarrel with my above view, because of two proven facts: 1) Egyptian also lacked an <i>r/l</i> distinction, and 2) The Middle-Kingdom Egyptian hieroglyphic system was the eventual basis of the Minoan script. But we have to keep in mind a number of facts: First, Minoan Hieroglyphs are not a simple copy of the Egyptian system. Apart from the fact that the objects depicted are different, and that the system is now a pure (open) syllabary, there are also many new phonetic values represented: for example, pure vowels. Minoans did not simply copy-paste the Egyptian system, like Mycenean Greeks did with Linear A. So the percieved similarities between the two are probably a non-issue. Second, we know pretty well from ancient authors, that <i>Eteocretan</i> language was confined to the eastern half of Crete: eastwards from the Knossos-Phaistos line. This is exactly where most relics of Minoan culture were found, also including the overwhelming majority of Linear A tablets. Thus even if the Western Cretan dialects were slightly different (the indigenous people were referred to with a different name. the <i>Kydones</i>). they would have had but a small impact on the development of the Minoan writing system. On a geographic territory as tiny as Eastern Crete, dialectal differences should have been negligible in the Middle Minoan era, as culture was otherwise very similar. And the uniformity of the Linear A records seems to testify this. Thus if Eteocretan was a descendant of Minoan, the latter should have had a good <i>r/l</i> distinction as well.<br /><br />I have been studying the Anatolian-Aegean connections a lot lately. As you likely know all too well, both the Aegean and the (Indo-European) Anatolian languages were subject to an areal effect, from the early Bronze Age onwards. Not only the phonological characters have become similar, words and even complete grammatical structures were also exchanged. Though it is in my intention to write a complete post about the Anatolian loans in Minoan, I can cite a few examples beforehand. For example, take the Minoan theonym <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/05/divine-names-on-linear-tablets.html">Alauta</a> (A-RA-U-DA = classic Greek <i>Eileithyia</i>). Her name is undoubtedly derived from the Proto-Indo-European stem <b><i>*h1leudh-</i></b> ='free'. The meaning of the name makes perfect sense, since <i>Eileithyia</i> was mostly worshipped by pregnant women, in hope of an easy childbirth and less complications and labour. However, the name <i>Alauta</i> already shows developments specifically pointing to an Anatolian language as the donor of this phrase: These include the disappearence of initial <i>h1</i> laryngeals with the consequential a-colouring of initial vowels (<i>h1e</i>-><i>a</i>), and the de-aspiration of stops with a subsequent conversion to a simple, voiceless stop (<i>dh</i>-><i>d</i>-><i>t</i>).<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TJYeyqFzZqI/AAAAAAAAAfs/H8174kUvS3g/s1600/Anatolian-languages.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 230px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TJYeyqFzZqI/AAAAAAAAAfs/H8174kUvS3g/s320/Anatolian-languages.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5518632249030043298" /></a><br />Phonetics could be borrowed too. The "Aegean" languages had many peculiar characteristics, largely shared with their Anatolian neighbours: For example, there was either no (Etruscan, Lemnian) or very little (Minoan, Hittite, Luwian) distinction between <i>o</i> and <i>u</i> vowels. Neither Minoan, nor Cypriot or Etruscan had any distinction between voiced or voiceless consonants: this is reflected by the lack of voiced consonants in writing. On the other hand, they certainly (Etruscan) or probably (Minoan) possessed a second series of consonants, not distinguished by voicing, but rather stress or aspiration. Linear A also used an additional series of stops - either stressed or (even more likely) aspirated. Thus the difference between -say- PA and PA3 syllables was that of <i>*pa</i> and <i>*pha</i> (or <i>*ppa</i>), while DA and TA likely represented <i>*ta</i> and <i>*tha</i> (or <i>*tta</i>). Of course, simple stops were likely commonly pronounced as voiced, while stressed stops were certainly voiceless (this explains the evolution of <i>*ta</i> and <i>*tha</i>/<i>*tta</i> sign-values to Linear B DA and TA), but voicing was originally not phonemic. Cuneiform Hittite also had this strange feature: it rejected the distinction between the original voiced and voiceless syllables: instead, a contrast system based on single/doubled consonants was used. This keeps hittitologists in uncertainty even up to this day: Did Hittite have a voiced-voiceless distinction at all? Although simple consonants mostly correspond to PIE voiced consonants (and conversely, the double ones are expected to be voiceless), the phonemic character of sounds is disputed. The problem is, there is no trace of voiced-voiceless distinction in Luwian Hieroglyphs either. It is certain,that even if Hittite did retain voiced-voiceless contrasting to some degree, it must have borrowed the Akkadian cuneiform script (and perhaps the Hieroglyphs, too) via a local substrate language that had no such contrasting at all, instead having lenis (simple) and fortis (double) consonants.<br /><br />Recently I wondered if some phonological features also went in the opposite way. We know all too well, that in Hittite or Luwian, no initial <i>r-</i> sounds were allowed. This was a restriction inherited from Proto-Indo-European, and the ancient Anatolian languages preserved it faithfully. Although the Aegean languages were not Indo-European by any means, but - as many examples show - were subject to heavy IE, particularly Anatolian influence. What if some borrowed this feature too? If so, that would provide a brilliant answer to the question why the Minoan scripts had no separate signs for <i>Rv</i>-type syllables. Because it was an acrophonic system, it simply could not build any signs for syllables forbidden in initial positions! <br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TJYfPBQTPZI/AAAAAAAAAf0/ZIR8kYaoPCY/s1600/Minoan-L-sign-evolution.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 240px; height: 320px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TJYfPBQTPZI/AAAAAAAAAf0/ZIR8kYaoPCY/s320/Minoan-L-sign-evolution.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5518632736284425618" /></a><br />Conforming the mentioned theory, members of the Linear A and B R-series all appear to be standing for <i>L</i>+<i>vowel</i> syllables. There are at least two, separate lines of evidence for this. The first one employs the Hieroglyphic counterparts of Linear A signs, and the meaning of their images. There are at least two signs in the R-series with a good etymology. The RE-sign, depicting sea lily flowers, possibly stands for an acrophonic abbreviation of <i>*(a)leri</i> ='lily' (disregarding my previous <a href="http://paleoglot.blogspot.com/2010/04/new-info-on-lily.html">concerns</a> about the conflicting origins of RE and RA3). The RU-sign, on the other hand, originally depicted a lyre, getting its phonetic value from <i>*lura</i> = 'lyre'. Though the stem-words are not attested in (the mainly accounting) Minoan texts, they very likely originate from or were transmitted via Crete, whence they were borrowed into a number of Mediterranian languages, such as Greek and Latin.<br /><br />The next line of evidence comes from the evolution of Linear Minoan syllabaries: namely the way Cypro-Minoan and Cypriot Linear C were derived from Linear A. Interestingly, the Cypriot scripts do have a distinction between <i>r</i> and <i>l</i> consonants: they present a different series for each. However, if one looks at the way the signs were drawn, will quickly realize that it is the R-series that is novel. Most of the L-series signs are actually taken over from the Linear A R-series without a major design change. This is a further confirmation about the "true" phonetic value of Linear AB R-series signs.<br /><br />At this point one could ask if Minoan scribes could not have found a simpler solution for this problem. Why did they not relax their rules for sign-generation, allowing a word with <i>v1cv2-</i> initial structure to be the basis of a <i>cv2</i> sign? It is the most rational solution one could find to their problem. The Luwian Hieroglyphic script - that was less stringently acrophonic than Minoan - also made widespread use of mid-stem open syllables. Indeed, some evidence <i>does</i> suggest that Minoans used such workarounds, too: The Linear A and Hieroglyphic PI sign undoubtedly depicts a bee. However, the <i>pi</i> syllable is rather rare as a word-initial in Linear A (it is a rare sign altogether), and possible cognates (Latin <i>apis</i> = 'bee') suggest that the corresponding word also started with a vowel in Minoan (<i>*api</i>? <i>*ipi</i>?). With this example in mind, it somewhat harder to explain why the scribes did not create any <i>Rv</i> signs. Clearly, the mere lack of initial <i>r-</i> is not a good enough answer on its own.<br /><br />This is not to say, that an <i>r</i>-sound was not allowed word-initially when in <i>clusters</i>. The solution to the above question probably lies in the way trills behaved in Minoan word-radicals. Unlike Hittite or Luwian, that admit a number (although a restricted number) of words with <i>v1Rv2-</i> initial structure, most Minoan words (reconstructed from Mycenean loan-words) seem to present the trills as part of a consonantal cluster (e.g. <i>v1Rcv2</i>). Minoan loan-words in Greek that begin with r- can mostly be traced back to stems with such initial consonantal clusters. For example, <i>Rhadamanthys</i> might continue <i>*Artamantha</i>, <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/03/flower-gardens-of-ancient-crete.html">rhodon</a> (= rose) <i>*wrata</i> or <i>*urta</i>. Words like <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/01/commodities-on-linear-tablets-part-i.html">rhétiné</a> (O-RA2-DI-NE = resin) and the divine name <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/07/mother-in-minoan-aegean-words-for.html">Rhea</a> (RA2-T?) actually stand with RA2 = <i>rya</i> in Minoan records, implying a consonantal cluster in the word-radical. <i>Ariadné</i> might have been as well <i>*Aryatna.</i> If true, this would have made it impossible for the scribes to find a suitable word with a word-initial pure <i>v1Rv2-</i> structure, because there were probably too few or maybe none. <br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TJY593S0PaI/AAAAAAAAAf8/BDZ-s68nxaI/s1600/Linear-A-RA2-evolution.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 168px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TJY593S0PaI/AAAAAAAAAf8/BDZ-s68nxaI/s320/Linear-A-RA2-evolution.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5518662128366796194" /></a><br />A further, elegant proof for the existence of initial <i>v1Rcv2-</i> clusters we find in the Minoan sign <b>RA2</b> = <i>*rya</i>. It clearly depicts a stream or small river. We know from Hittite, that the word-stem for 'to flow' (and also 'river') was <i>arsa-</i>. The Hittite word is derived from an IE stem <i>*h1ers-</i> = 'to flow', also attested in Sanscrit as <i>arśa-</i>. But we should not stop here. This is not the first time we see perfectly IE stems in purely Aegean context (a good example is PO-TO-KU-RO in Linear A from the IE stem <i>*pot-</i> = 'powerful') If we allowed a hypothetic "Proto-Aegean" language to borrow the same <i>*arsa</i> (to flow), that would nicely admit a Minoan word <i>*arya</i> = 'stream' (by lenition). Our theory can also explain a previously shunned connection: the phonetic value of the corresponding Linear C sign. Although it is clear, even to an untrained eye that the Cypriot ZO sign is almost identical in design to the Linear AB RA2 sign, no one has ever been able to give a consistent derivation of the Linear C value. Now we have one: If the Cypriot word for 'stream' was something like <i>*azzo</i> (by assibilation from <i>*arsa</i>), it would be more than meaningful to suggest a correction of phonetic value of the "river-sign" from <i>rya</i> to <i>zo</i>. And this is not the only case when such Cretan-Cypriot lingustic discordances have triggered a slight sign-value correction: For another good example, see the article of Miguel Valerio discussing the identity of the Linear A DU sign with the Linear C SU one. Unfortunately, we cannot establish such a nice etymology for the Linear AB RO2 = <i>ryo</i> sign, as we cannot determine the object it depicts. All I can say at the moment its that it likely also represents a "true" <i>r</i>-sound, like its RA2 counerpart (given that it alternates with the former in Linear A texts).<br /><br />Given these problems with the Minoan syllabaries, it is no surprise that the scribes used both the L- and Ry- signs indiscriminately, for both <i>r</i> and <i>l</i> sounds. The L-series was probably used as a shorthand solution in place of open syllables with <i>r-</i>. While in the earliest Hieroglyphic documents, the scribes likely also experimented with the use of Ry- signs (e.g. RA2) at this position, the latter eventually remained constrained to the clusters <i>ry-</i> or <i>ly-</i>. And so was the clumsy Linear B ortography born.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-92021129622622696392010-08-21T16:00:00.001-07:002010-09-15T15:48:23.852-07:00Pre-Greek place-names of the AegeanIn my next post, I shall briefly tackle an interesting and very popular approach to the research of ancient Aegean languages. It is all about the faint traces a language can leave after millenia of its disappearence: the toponyms or place-names. Thanks to the conservative nature of our species, while conquests, migrations or cultural assimilation may swap the ethnic composition of entire regions, names of towns, mountains or rivers often survive without any major change. For example, while the overwhelming majority of Turkey now speaks an altaic language, towns and villages of Anatolia preserve their names from the Byzantine era, some of them even have original Hittite names - only in a slightly changed form. <br /><br />The fact that a large portion of toponyms in ancient Hellas were actually of non-Greek origin, has already drawn attention in the beginning of the 20 century. Professors Blegen and Hailey have published their milestone article in 1928, analysing a large number of ancient toponyms in and around Greece. They come to the conclusion that there is a surprising homogeneity among toponyms found in Greece and western Turkey, pointing to an unexpected lingustic union in these regions <i>predating</i> the "coming of Greeks". They have also found intriguing patterns in the way these names were formed. The most typical and common ones were place-names ending in either <i>-nthos</i>/<i>-ntha</i> or <i>-(s)sos</i>/<i>-(s)sa</i>. Other scholars later expanded their lists and confirmed their findings. What I shall do now is show a good collection of these toponyms on maps, to give you an approximate picture of their geographical distribution. It took me a good deal of time to comply. My main sources were Blegen & Hailey (JSTOR, 1928), the neat list of Best & de Vries & Brill (Book title: Thracians and Myceneans, 1989), the Barrington Atlas (published in 2000), and many other minor articles. I admit I may not be the best in calculating geographic coordinates: if you encounter any major error or can give me further examples I could put on my map, let me have them. I welcome any comments, as always.<br /> <br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TIPTIDIo8hI/AAAAAAAAAfM/NcHThpLRKcs/s1600/Pre-Greek-01.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 222px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TIPTIDIo8hI/AAAAAAAAAfM/NcHThpLRKcs/s320/Pre-Greek-01.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5513482504065577490" /></a><br />First of all, let us analyse the first class: Names ending in <b>-nos</b>/<b>-na</b> are among the most commonly seen in southern Hellas and western Asia Minor, also on the Cyclades and Crete. These are the most overlooked ones, too: Despite their "ordinary look", most of them do not possess any meaningful Greek (or even Indo-European) ethymology. On the other hand, they perfectly fit the pattern we would expect from adjectives in some ancient languages of Aegean origin. The suffix <i>-na</i> is well-attested in Etruscan, and also found in Eteocretan (Φραισονα = "Praisian", from the town of Praisos). Conforming this pattern, many names falling into this category have no vowels inserted between the stem and the <i>*-na</i> suffix. This is quite an un-Indo-European feature, yet perfectly explicable by a once-widespread "Aegean" presence in the area, from what Eteocretan, Eteocypriot, Lemnian and Etruscan are just meager, relictual remains. It should not be forgotten that there does exist a similar (perhaps very distantly related) Indo-European formative <i>*-en-</i>, but the IE languages tend to preserve that <i>-e-</i> vowel.<br /> <br />Toponyms ending in <i>-nos</i>/<i>-na</i> are widespread all around the Aegean, also found on Cyprus and even in Eastern Anatolia. Yet the latter ones are generally thought to be from Hurrian and Hattic but not Aegean origin. Originally, most of them did not end in <i>-na</i>. This is demonstratable in quite a few cases, e.g. <i>Tyana</i> comes from <i>Tuwanuwa</i> and <i>Adana</i> from <i>Adaniya</i>. On the other hand, there is a surprisingly high concentration of originally <i>*-na</i>-type names on Crete, some of them already mentioned in Linear B sources (e.g. <i>Itanos</i> as U-TA-NO). Thus there can be little doubt about the close relationship between the language of Minoan Crete and those "Aegean" languages once spoken in Mainland Greece and Western Anatolia - only evidenced by their toponyms.<br /><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TIPTZ8EJjsI/AAAAAAAAAfU/0YMO5GmnnX0/s1600/Pre-Greek-02.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 222px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TIPTZ8EJjsI/AAAAAAAAAfU/0YMO5GmnnX0/s320/Pre-Greek-02.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5513482811405340354" /></a><br />To the second major class of toponyms belong names ending in either <b>-nthos</b>/<b>-ntha</b> (Mainland Greece, Cyclades, Crete) or <b>-ndos</b>/<b>-nda</b> (Ionia, Lydia, Rhodes, Lycia). This type is slighly less common in Greece than the others, yet I managed to glean a sufficient number of examples to show that their geographical distribution is no different from the other "Pre-Greek" place-names. In Western Anatolia (especially in Lycia) on the other hand, they are the most typical toponyms. Apart from these main versions, there is also a variant in <i>-nza</i>/<i>-nzos</i> seen in Eastern Anatolia. Some Greek toponyms end in normal <i>-s</i> in their nominative case, only showing the <i>-nth-</i> stem in oblique cases (e.g. <i>Tiryns</i> [gen: <i>Tirynthos</i>]). Heteroclites were absolutely typical in Ancient Greek, adoption of this feature on non-Greek terms shows how perfectly these names were assimilated into early Greek.<br /><br />When trying to interpret the meaning of this suffix, we encounter unexpected difficulties. Mycenean Greek had no such formative; and it was not used by Etruscan, either. But from the analysis of loan-words entering early Greek (e.g. <span style="font-style:italic;">Labyrinthos</span>, etc), it is obvious that this suffix must have been existing, and still productive in Minoan. Fortunately it also existed in ancient Anatolian languages, like Hittite and Luwian, whence we can find out the exact meaning. Interestingly enough, Hittite presents us not only <i>one</i>, but <i>two</i> classes of such endings. One of them, the <i>-wand-</i> formative has a general possessive sense of meaning (e.g. <i>esharwands</i> = 'bloody' from <i>eshar</i> = 'blood'). This one is perfectly explainable from an IE <i>*-went-</i> suffix, sporadically also seen in Mycenean Greek (e.g. O-DA-TWE-TA = οδόνταϝέντα (<i>odontawenta</i>) = 'teethed'). The other ending is the fairly common <i>-and-</i> formative, carrying a 'collective' sense of meaning (e.g. <i>udneyands</i> = 'all lands' from <i>udne</i> = 'land'). It was also used as an "agentive", when forming subjects from neuter nouns. The same structure is also seen in the Luwian "collective plural": For example, the word <i>dawi</i> = 'eye' admits a normal plural <i>dawa</i> meaning 'eyes'. But when speaking about eyes of different individuals, the correct plural form is <i>dawanda</i>. Although some linguists seek to derive the latter formative with the Proto-IE <i>*-ent-</i> present participle, the collective meaning is hardly explainable. It is a more reasonable explanation that this is non-IE loan structure.<br /><br />Conforming this duality, a high number of Greek toponyms actually has an ending in <i>-u-</i>, i.e. <i>-ynthos</i>. The rest most commonly ends with <i>-i-</i>, as <i>-inthos</i>. These would conform to the <i>-wanda</i> and <i>-anda</i> endings of Anatolian toponyms. What is strange, the <i>-ynthos</i> type toponyms are also found on places, where no early IE presence could be expected, such as Crete. And when we remove the <i>-ynthos</i> ending, we get stems practically meaningless in Greek. We are left with the conclusion that some ancient, supposedly non-IE languages used these formatives, and while the <i>*-(i)ntha</i> ending might be orginally Aegean, they might have borrowed the <i>*-wuntha</i> (<i>-ynthos</i>) version from some early Indo-European language, perhaps an Anatolian one.<br /><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TIPTvxQUpdI/AAAAAAAAAfc/yUhHOgKu1bA/s1600/Pre-Greek-03.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 222px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TIPTvxQUpdI/AAAAAAAAAfc/yUhHOgKu1bA/s320/Pre-Greek-03.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5513483186460730834" /></a><br />Last, but not least, there is the group of toponyms ending in either <b>-ssos</b>/<b>-ssa</b> or simply <b>-sos</b>/<b>-sa</b>. This is the most populous class by far. In a geographic sense, it also extends further than any other type. Many examples can be gleaned from outside the Aegean, such as <i>Naissos</i> (present day Niš, Serbia), <i>Orgyssos</i> (in Illyria) or <i>Arabissos</i> (in the Taurus mountains, eastern Turkey). One cannot exclude the possibility of either the Greek colonists spreading "usual" place-names of Hellas, or simple hellenization of local toponyms, no matter how meaningless these were for Greek speakers. Though the Thracian names in <i>-dessa</i> do not seem to belong here (I did not put them on the map either), we can also see variants in <i>-ttos</i>/<i>-tta</i>, conforming the Ionic Greek dialects. <br /><br />Almost all the languages originating in the region have had a version of this formative: The <i>-(i)śa</i> suffix was used by Etruscans as a patronymic. In Anatolian languages, the related genitival adjectives were highly popular: the <i>-assa</i> type endings even superseded normal genitives in Luwian. We only have fragmentary evidence from Minoan, but it looks promising: Linear A names ending in I-ZA (<i>*-itsa</i>) likely belong to this class. According to some opinions, this suffix was not only used by substratum languages, but also had an effect on the development of Mycenean Greek: its endings were sometimes morphed into faintly similar structures, i.e. <i>μελισσα</i> (<i>*melitia</i>) = 'bee' from <i>μελι</i> = 'honey' or <i>ϝανασσα</i> (<i>*wanaktia</i>) = 'queen' from <i>ϝαναξ</i> = 'king'. Nevertheless, it is hard to track the origins of this suffix, because Proto-Indo-European also had a very similar form of singular genitive (variously reconstructed as <i>*-(o)s</i>, <i>*-oso</i> or <i>*-osyo</i>) and related adjectives. Only one thing is certain: these formatives almost invariantly express a possessive sense of meaning. The same should be expected from the cited toponyms.<br /><br />Of course, some names can come in more than one version. Apart from spelling variants (i.e. <i>Kérinthos</i> [Boiotia] is almost certainly the same name as <i>Korinthos</i> [Isthmos]), there are some regular changes as well. Most common are pairs with and without a formative. Harald Haarmann gives a nice collection of them in his publication (2007): <i>Alos</i> (Thessaly) vs. <i>Alinda</i> (Caria), <i>Bargos</i> (Illyria) vs. <i>Bargasa</i> (Caria), <i>Kyrba</i> (Crete) vs. <i>Kyrbasa</i> (Caria), <i>Leba</i> (Macedonia) vs. <i>Lebinthos</i> (Caria), <i>Oinoe</i> (Attica) vs. <i>Oenoanda</i> (Lycia), <i>Passa</i> (Thrace) vs. <i>Passanda</i> (Caria), <i>Prinos</i> (Argolid) vs. <i>Prinassos</i> (Caria), <i>Sardos</i> (Illyria) vs. <i>Sardessos</i> (Troad) and <i>Tegea</i> (Arcadia) vs. <i>Tegessos</i> (Cyprus). Stems with more than one ending - though less common - also exist, e.g. <i>Alyssos</i> (Arcadia) vs. <i>Aloanda</i> (Lycia) or <i>Parnes</i> [gen:<i>Parnethos</i>] (Attica) vs. <i>Parnassos</i> (Boiotia). <br /><br />A single place can also have more than one name: e.g. the <i>Dirphys</i> mountain in Euboia is also referred to as <i>Dirphossos</i>, and the township in Laconia by the name <i>Kardamylessos</i> is also called <i>Kardamylé</i>. In Hittite sources, some even more intriguing variations exist. The land of Caria is not only referred to as <i>Karkiya</i>, but also as <i>Karkissa</i>. One could argue that the different names were used by different languages spoken in the region, i.e. the Indo-European Hittites may have preferred the form <i>Karkiya</i>, while some indigenous Aegean tribes (the Karkas?) may have stuck with the form <i>Karkissa</i>. Such a "partial translation" of names can also explain the puzzling evolution of some toponyms. For example, it was always problematic for linguists to derive the Greek name of Troy, <i>Ilion</i> from the Hittite <i>Wilusa</i>. But the name <i>Wilusa</i> strongly looks Hattic: the <i>-sa</i> ending seems to be the same as that in <i>Hattu-sa</i>. If so, One could easily imagine a variant of the name in a more Indo-European form <i>*Wiliya</i> (that was not recorded in Hittite sources). From the latter, the Greek name <i>Ilion</i> would come simply and rather straightforwardly.<br /><br />Lastly, it should be mentioned that some of these names (especially the longer ones) also enable us to reconstruct some more complex word-formations of Aegean tongues. For example, there is the group of names ending not just in <i>*-na</i>, but in <i>*-sarna</i> (<i>Phalasarna</i>, <i>Alasarna</i>, <i>Halisarna</i>, etc.). Since the stem <i>*sar-</i> has a meaning 'upwards', 'high', 'great', etc. in all Anatolian languages (also do not forget the Etruscan words <i>śar</i> = numeral '10' and <i>srenc</i> = 'mural' or the Philistine <i>seren</i> = 'prince') it is reasonable to translate these place-names as '-burg' or '-castle'. Just remember that the germanic word <i>burg</i> or <i>borough</i> (or Greek <i>pyrgos</i>) also comes from an IE stem (<i>*bhregh-</i>) meaning 'high'.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-79823374017580830932010-07-26T16:26:00.000-07:002010-08-02T15:07:28.731-07:00'Mother' in Minoan? - Aegean words for motherhood and childbirthMy next post will be an illustration of the difficulties one faces when doing an in-depth research of Aegean languages. It also nicely illustrates how revarding it can be if we not only collect the tiny shards diligently, but also try to re-assemble the vase from them (Let us hope hope what I fitted, belongs to the <span style="font-style:italic;">same</span> vase, and not some artificial hybrid abomination, though).<br /><br />The Lemnos stele is perhaps the most famous Aegean relic ever found: sole testament to a now-extinct language once spoken on the island and beyond. The most striking feature of Lemnian language is its close relation to Etruscan: like some "missing link" in paleontology, this is the ultimate proof of the latter one's origins in the Aegean region. Despite the clear affinity of the overwhelming majority of Lemnian phrases to Etruscan ones, there are quite a few ones on the stele that fiercely resist translation. One of these phrases is the enigmatic '<span style="font-style:italic;">Zeronaith ewistho</span>'. It is clearly a stand-alone phrase, as it is repated (in different context) on the other side as '<span style="font-style:italic;">ewistho Zeronaith</span>'. I have capitalized the term 'Zeronaith' because of one simple reason: its <span style="font-style:italic;">*-ith</span> ending would normally indicate a locative case, so <span style="font-style:italic;">Zerona</span> was likely a township or village of some sort. It is also mentioned in the phrase '<span style="font-style:italic;">wanalasial Zeronai Morinail</span>' - as pertaining to the city of Myrina, capital of Lemnos. The <span style="font-style:italic;">*-o</span> ending (corresponding to Etruscan <span style="font-style:italic;">*-u</span> ) on the other word is clearly a marker of past participle. But what could a phrase "<span style="font-style:italic;">ewisth</span>-ed at <span style="font-style:italic;">Zerona</span>" mean?<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TFccpelj66I/AAAAAAAAAe0/6MfNeb6sW8k/s1600/Lemnos-stele.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 303px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TFccpelj66I/AAAAAAAAAe0/6MfNeb6sW8k/s320/Lemnos-stele.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5500896968767171490" /></a><br />I am not the first one to ponder over the meaning of the cited expression. Others have already suggested that it might refer to some honorary title. Though I am heavily doubting that. The stele already features one word suspicious of detailing a title or magistrate of some sort: <span style="font-style:italic;">maraz</span>. It seems to be unrelated to the Etruscan <span style="font-style:italic;">*mur-</span> = 'to die' term. So "<span style="font-style:italic;">maraz maw sialhweiz awiz</span>" does not refer to how long Holaie lived, but rather his rank at his death. The word <span style="font-style:italic;">maw</span> is not a numeral as repeatedly and wrongly assumed, but an unknown adjective to <span style="font-style:italic;">maraz</span> (if related to Hittite <span style="font-style:italic;">muwa</span> = 'powerful', could it have been "grand judge"?). Thus the last sentence on the stele: "<span style="font-style:italic;">Ziwai awiz sialhwiz, marazm awiz aomai</span>" should mean something like: "died sixty years old, became <span style="font-style:italic;">maraz</span> a year before" or something similar (-m is a verbal conjunction, just like in Etruscan). Interestingly enough, in the Lycian language, the word <span style="font-style:italic;">maraza</span> meant 'judge' or 'arbitrator' (thanks to prof Melchert's <a href="http://www.indo-european.nl/cgi-bin/response.cgi?root=leiden&morpho=0&basename=\data\ie\lycian&first=1&text_lemma=maraza&method_lemma=substring&text_meaning=&method_meaning=substring&text_attest=&method_attest=substring&text_comments=&method_comments=substring&text_any=&method_any=substring&sort=lemma">Lycian dictionary</a>). Looks like a clear borrowing or shared vocabulary there.<br /><br />This way we clearly diminished the possibility that <span style="font-style:italic;">ewistho Zeronaith</span> refers to a title. Then what could it mean? It was so important that it was repeated twice, just like the age of Holaie. This gives a fairly logical guess at its meaning: "<span style="font-weight:bold;">born in Zerona</span>"! That would remain nothing more than an elegant theory if we had gotten no help from other Aegean sources. This is what I attempt to do in the current post: gleaning bits of evidence from other Aegean languages, namely Eteocypriot and Minoan. Unfortunately, no help avails from Etruscan.<br /><br />In the other corner of the Aegean region (though geographically outside it), similarly mysterious inscriptions have yielded evidence of the Eteocretan language, once spoken in and around the city of Amathous on classical Cyprus. One of the Eteocpriot inscriptions yield an interesting phrase, worth to examine. The gravestone inscription I am speating of, is the following:<br /><br /><table style="border: 1px dotted green" align="center" cols="1"><tbody><tr><td align="center">TU A-LI-RA-NI O-I-TE TU-SU TA-LE-JA PA-KU-KE A-NO-TI TA-SO-TI A-PU-E-MA O-I-TE A-LI-RA-NI MA-NA A-SO-NA TU-KA I-MI-NO-NA A-JA-I A-KO-? A-NA TA-SO A-SO-NA TU-KA I-MI-NO-NA TU-MI-RA O-I-TE I-MI-KA-NI O-I-TE TA-KO E-NE-MI-NA O-I-TE TA-RA-WO E-NE-MI-NA ?-KA-LA-WA-TI-KE MU-SO-TI</td></tr></tbody></table><br />This text presents a rich inventory of pronouns and other terms, but it is the word O-I-TE that interests us at this moment. In terms of occurrances, this is the only Eteocretan text that contains this word. Its surprisingly high frequency spurred some scholars to believe that this was <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=WJbd0m6YaFkC&pg=PA244&dq=eteocypriot+O-I-TE&hl=hu&ei=DTpXTI7_EaCT4gbZ462mBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=eteocypriot%20O-I-TE&f=false">a conjunction</a> of some sort. Nevertheless, I tried substituting that meaning into the text and all I got was a fairly meaningless and overstrained structure. A conjunction should divide words and sentences of equal and symmetric structure, not completely different ones. And be featured in a fixed order within a sentence. Therefore I believe O-I-TE is actually a noun or adjective added on (as an explanation) to a number of phrases within the text: e.g. A-LI-RA-NI. In the row before the last, it is added on to a number of words that seem to be either nouns or adjectives (because of the *-na ending, a well-known Aegean formative). The sequence TU-MI-RA I-MI-KA-NI PU E-NE-MI-NA PA-NA-MO is also featured in a different inscription. [PU seems to be a pronoun, a counterpart to TU, perhaps in a sense that/what or something like that. Interestingly, it was written as an enclitic, fused to the following word.] It seems like, therefore that we have an expanded phrase here, with a high emphasis on the phrase O-I-TE. <br /><br />What could this have been? It was already suggested by some that - because it is added on to the phrase A-LI-RA-NI that seems to be a name, that it expresses some sort title or familial relationship. It has been proposed that its meaning might have been 'mother', nevertheless, it is a word quite dissimilar to the Etruscan <span style="font-style:italic;">ati</span>. Even if it is unrelated to the Etruscan word for 'mother', it displays a certain degree of similarity to the term <span style="font-style:italic;">ewistho</span>. There are at least three important things to observe with <span style="font-style:italic;">oite</span>: <br /><br />First, the Cypriot Syllabary system has a separate sign for WI (and used by Eteocretan in word-initial position as well), so O-I- is not an approximation for <span style="font-style:italic;">*wi-</span>. Instead, this unusual diphtong (for an Aegean language) might have evolved from something like <span style="font-style:italic;">*aui-</span>. Second, there is no distinction between 't' and 'th' in the Cypriot script (even if it might have existed in Linear A), so we must assume Eteocyprot has lost the Proto-Aegean aspirated consonants. This way, we can suppose a general development *th -> *t in Eteocypriot, that had already happened in the Bronze age (As far as I can judge, <a href="http://sites.google.com/site/collesseum/cyprusscripts">the Cypro-Minoan script</a> had no signs for aspirated consonants at all, those inherited from Linear A were lost quite early, already in the middle of the 2nd millenium BC). Lastly, the Cypriot syllabary differs slightly from Linear A and B in terms of orthography. Not only word-terminal consonants are written out in Cypriot syllabary (with a helper vowel -e), but consonantal clusters with sybillants are also resolved (those with nasals are simplified still). For example, the word άριστος = 'noble' is written as A-RI-TO in Linear B, but A-RI-SI-TO-SE in Cypriot Linear C. This way we can be pretty sure that there was no -s- within the phrase O-I-TE (otherwise it would have been O-I-SE-TE). The cited observations enable us to reconstruct a putative original form of <span style="font-style:italic;">oite</span> as <span style="font-style:italic;">*awithe</span>. As for the explanation for the lack of -s- or an "s mobile", see later. <br /><br />Some Minoan finds may also reinforce our theory about the meaning of the above-mentioned words. If we look at the Phaistos Disc, our eyes can meet a pretty interesting sign: Pha *06, a sign obviously depicting a woman of some sort. The interesting thing is, that - unlike most depictions of women in Minoan art - this one looks rather stocky. This fact was for long used by those disbelieving the Cretan origins of the disc, as an argument. While I can confirm the fact that the shape of this woman is a bit unusual for the depiction of "ordinary" women in Crete, it is neither of foreign origin, nor accidentally crudely designed. What if it was intentionally drawn this way? Well, pregnant women, they do have an oversized belly. And could we imagine a more elegant way of expressing the term 'mother' in hieroglyphs, than drawing an image of a pregnant woman?<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TFcgq3XpY3I/AAAAAAAAAe8/04jbHo01PVA/s1600/Phaistos-woman-sign.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 314px; height: 320px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TFcgq3XpY3I/AAAAAAAAAe8/04jbHo01PVA/s320/Phaistos-woman-sign.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5500901390646076274" /></a><br />The other interesting thing in the mentioned sign is its phonetic value. Since its shape is pretty special, but the sign is otherwise common on the disc, it very likely corresponds to a well-known Linear A sign. From the very few signs that can plausibely derived from a "woman-shape", only E and WI match reasonanably well. Together with (the much less probable matches) DE and KE, these are about the only signs, that could possibly be derived from such a special shape. Now, the value 'E' can be quickly excluded, based on the junctions with other signs: QE-E or I-E are practically impossible in Linear A (should have been -e- and -i-je-). This leaves us with the value WI as the most probable one. Indeed, it is not impossible to derive the (slightly asymmetric, pyramid-shaped) WI sign of Linear A and B from an image depicting a woman. The sign is otherwise pretty rare in Linear A (practically missing from the Hieroglyphic corpus), but does occur word-initially in some phrases, e.g. WI-TE-RO [HT25], WI-NA-DU [KH5] or WI-TE-JA-MU [PL Zf1].<br /><br />At this point, we could settle with the fact that the word for woman (or a particular type of women, say 'mother') probably began with <span style="font-style:italic;">wi-</span> in the Minoan language. But the story does not end here. By sheer luck, it seems that we have even more on the Phaistos Disc. It is interesting to observe that the words that begin with Pha *06 also, almost invariably continue with signs certainly (Pha *35 = 'TE') or putatively (Pha *18 [TI? TU?]) belonging to the T-series (th+vowel?) of Minoan syllabaries. Thus it is possible that the entire word WI-T(E) (supposedly 'child-bearer', thus 'mother') is written out on the disc, in various compound phrases. As many scholars suggest that what the disc features is a hymn or prayer, it would make much of a sense when referring to female deities. While there are a gret number of different "wedged" terms on that document, none of them were identified with a theonym so far. But one cannot resist the lure of the thought, that the most common one, *45-*07 stands for the original Minoan name of great goddess <span style="font-style:italic;">Razija</span> (sign *45 undoubtedly corresponds to Lin AB RA2). And indeed - what epithet could fit better for titaness <span style="font-style:italic;">Rhea</span>, who gave birth to almost the entire pantheon of Olympic gods, than 'mother'? <br /><br />At this point, it is obligatory to look at the inventory of other language families, that might have existed in that region. Interestingly, one of the Proto-Indo-European phrases reconstructed, <span style="font-weight:bold;">h<sub>1</sub>euhdhr</span> (= 'udder') does show a high similarity to <span style="font-style:italic;">ewistho</span> and the rest. An 'h' could have easily evolved to 's' in some languages and disappeared in the rest. Although it invariably refers to privy parts of female animals, and never human ones in IE languages, in a lingustic group only marginally related to Proto-IE, one can easily imagine a shift of meaning. And that could have led straight to the words we see here. It can perhaps be compared to what we see in some modern languages, e.g. in Spanish <span style="font-style:italic;">mamá</span> means mother, formed in an analogue to <span style="font-style:italic;">mama</span> = breast. It is also interesting to see that a semi-related stem of proto-IE: <span style="font-weight:bold;">udero-</span>, normally meaning 'belly' or 'gut', evolved to words like <span style="font-style:italic;">ὑστέρα</span> (Greek) and <span style="font-style:italic;">uterus</span> (Latin), specifically meaning 'womb' in languages of the Mediterranean. Although it is hard to track the origins of medical terms (because the ancients were no masters of human anatomy), cross-contamination of word stems seems like an attractive explanation. Since these words do have a similar form to our reconstructed Aegean phrases, relating to motherhood and childbirth, it is tempting to see an Aegean (Minoan and perhaps Etruscan) influence over the meaning of this stem, shifting it from 'intestines' to 'uterus'.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5407840403433424940.post-82590007405643567592010-07-01T10:40:00.000-07:002010-07-26T16:15:27.566-07:00More Minoan signet rings - Tales of Goddesses, Heroes and MythsAs I promised before, I will present a new series of Minoan signet-rings, just to leave you enough riddles to ponder on. This time, I will not refrain myself from posting images of signs even I have no idea about how to read properly. Just recline and enjoy the pictures.<br /><br />In the first place, I would like to introduce the image I left out of <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/05/mythical-figures-on-cretan-jewellery.html">my previous post</a>. This beautiful, though somewhat crude ring from Mochlos supports us with a further image from the "divine romance" series we have seen before. This time the female figure (goddess) is sitting on a boat, carrying a stem of <span style="font-style:italic;">Ferula</span> plant with her. Above the figure, a series of tiny objects is carved into the metal surface. They exactly repeat the word seen on one of the previous rings, this time in a more proper order: PI-PI-DO-NA.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TEOGfd1eE3I/AAAAAAAAAeM/RF7U_QatvuY/s1600/Minoan-seals-01.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 199px; height: 320px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TEOGfd1eE3I/AAAAAAAAAeM/RF7U_QatvuY/s320/Minoan-seals-01.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5495383845465101170" /></a><br />On the next seal, we can observe yet another scene of the "divine romance" story we have seen in our previous post. Our favourite character, the "god with the bush" is attempting to entice a different woman - with perhaps less success. The object the female figure is grasping for, is the famous "sacral knot". A recurring theme in minoan iconography, this "sacral knot"(named by Evans) is not much of a rope, but a shoulderpad worn exclusively by females of high importance. This symmetric/double object must be distingusihed from the simple (asymmetric, single) neck-ties shown as worn by both male and female commoners. Adorned with two large appendices resembling feathery wings, if such piece of clothing existed in real life, it must have been impressive. Like some "angel feather wings", it is depicted as worn by goddesses or high priestesses only. In one case, we see a trinity of female figures, but only the central (and tallest) woman wears these shoulderpads. If the object is a divine attribute only (Like the staff and shoes of Hermes, for example), could this have been something similar to the "sheddable" wings of varkyries in Nordic mythology? I have no idea, but it seems like an interesting parallel (see the legend of Wayland).<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TEOG_CVsdVI/AAAAAAAAAeU/iI1Tc-wHjkM/s1600/Minoan-seals-02.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 205px; height: 320px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TEOG_CVsdVI/AAAAAAAAAeU/iI1Tc-wHjkM/s320/Minoan-seals-02.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5495384387839882578" /></a><br />If we look at the series of objects above the head of the goddess, we can immediately recognize a few signs. The first one of the series looks like a peculiarly modified double-axe (or 'A' sign). After that, the two following signs show a certain relationship to one of the inscriptions we have seen before. On an earlier seal, we have seen a name <span style="font-weight:bold;">?</span>-NI (above the cyring/sleeping goddess), now we have a variant <span style="font-weight:bold;">?</span>-NE. The character I marked with <span style="font-weight:bold;">?</span> is the same on the two inscriptions, resembling either a cypress-tree (Pha *13, reading quite uncertain) or a twig (Pha *35, Hie *25, Lin AB *04 reading: 'TE'). The last sign is undoubtedly a one-handled vessel (Pha *20, Hie *52-53), corresponding to the 'NE' sign (*24) in Linear A and B.<br />As I told before, the 'A' sign (Pha *21, Hie *42, Lin AB *08) may occupy a special position. It does not necessarily form part of the name: it could denote something different. If we look at it closely enough, we can realize a strange modification of the sign: the two diagonal lines (with ends). It could have been an artistic modification (like the "rays" on the Phaistos disc version of sign 'A'), or something unexpected: <span style="font-style:italic;">a ligature</span>! <br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TEOHSpx1dvI/AAAAAAAAAec/2ZywL3xyCXU/s1600/Sacral-knots.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 302px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TEOHSpx1dvI/AAAAAAAAAec/2ZywL3xyCXU/s320/Sacral-knots.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5495384724844410610" /></a><br />In Linear B, no names were ever written with ligatures, and conversely, all ligatures observed in Linear A denote different types of goods and wares, but never names. Yet Minoan Hieroglyphic sealstones sometimes do feature ligatures - probably due to the artistic design - in words that cannot stand for anything other, but names. If this sign is indeed a ligature, then what could be the other sign added on to the double-axe? One sign immediately gives itself: the 'SA' or 'linen' sign (Pha *22, Hie *19, Lin AB *31). With branches always drawn upwards in Linear scripts, but frequently downwards in Hieroglyphics (and on the Phaistos Disc), it is a credible one: not only because of its shape, but because Hieroglyphic seals also feature the term (word, name?) '<a href="http://fenzi.dssg.unifi.it/dbas/seal.php?idseal=82">A-SA</a>'. This element is also found in a number of Aegean word-stems, dealing with ritualistic contexts: for example, <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/06/kafkania-pebble-testament-to-strangest.html">A-SO-NA</a> or <a href="http://minoablog.blogspot.com/2010/01/more-on-libation-formula-statuette-of.html">A-SA-SA-RA-ME</a>. If so, the term can only mean one thing: 'god(dess)', apparently a cognate to the Etruscan <span style="font-style:italic;">ais</span> = 'divinity' (if the latter is not of <a href="http://paleoglot.blogspot.com/2010/06/is-etruscan-ais-deity-indo-european.html">IE origin</a>). Its use would be quite plausible on a seal depicting mythical characters, especially when standing alongside their names. Another theoretic possibility is a ligature A+RE (which is even better based on the shape of the Hiero 'lily' or 'RE' sign (Pha *39, Hie *31, Lin AB *27), if turned upside down), but it would make perhaps less sense to read (A+RE-TE?-NE). That would enable to read and indentify the mentioned names as <span style="font-style:italic;">*Theni</span> [Themis] and <span style="font-style:italic;">*Arthne</span> [Artemis], but I feel this is overly contrived at this stage. Better not walk this path until we find objects with texts easier to read.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TEONOljOUyI/AAAAAAAAAek/Qdwr96YlJ3o/s1600/Minoan-seals-03.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 186px; height: 320px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TEONOljOUyI/AAAAAAAAAek/Qdwr96YlJ3o/s320/Minoan-seals-03.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5495391252059673378" /></a><br />There are plenty of other seals - offering us at least a slight glimpse into the rich world of now-lost Minoan myths. I am not boasting: The next two images feature scenes of stories similar to that of the classic Greek heroes. On the upper seal, we can see a proud man raising to the domain of divines. On one side, a goddess is throning between two mighty birds (undoubtedly a divine attribute of some sort), on the other side, a god is tending to a mythical bush. Unfortunately for all of us, the inscription on this newly-found seal (from Poros Irakliou, published after 2000) is rather badly preserved. Running above the head of the protagonist, it more than likely records his name - but rendered almost unreadable by the wear of ages. A loss to religious history on a high scale, I am afraid.<br /><br />The seal below the previous one features a very different story: in that case, the male protagonist is seen as surrounded by three females. Playful as they look, they resemble the nymphs of classic Greek myths. The one on the left displays an unmistakable attempt of seduction towards the protagonist, without him even noticing it. The rightmost one also leans towards him in a flirting pose. The female at the centre is however, aiming at the male figure with her arrows, in a hostile manner. The moment the seal is capturing is when the hero disarms the hunting goddess or nymph, by grasping the bow held in her hand. The inscription (or inscriptions) above the head of figures is crudely cut, and in a bad shape,and do not enable a solid transliteration. I wish we could learn the name of characters involved in the story, but that wish might remain unfulfilled forever.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TEONoA4UnRI/AAAAAAAAAes/mGw4ZDJoo_E/s1600/Minoan-seals-04.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 320px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_a_qIRGD3pJ0/TEONoA4UnRI/AAAAAAAAAes/mGw4ZDJoo_E/s320/Minoan-seals-04.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5495391688892652818" /></a><br />For an appropriate ending, I present a few more enigmatic seal impressions found on Crete. One of these is the famous "Master Seal" found at Khania. Contrary to the popular belief, it most likely depicts the protector-deity of the city, and not a king. On the right and left side of the figure towering over the Minoan town, at least two, heavily damaged characters can be recognized. The rightmost one was almost obliterated (that is why it is missing from the "retouched" image), but was probably a cow-head characher (missing from Phaistos Disc, Hie *12, Lin AB *23 = MU). The leftmost character is slightly better preserved, but its value is unrecognizable due to the damage suffered. The semicircular string of points above the figure does not belong to the inscription: it is the depiction of the sun, so typical of Minoan iconography (and found on many other seals, too). It is concieveable that more signs were present on the original sealing, but this is all what was left. Needless to say, I cannot make out anything meaningful of the two surviving signs. <br /><br />The sealing I show as last presents yet another grave problem - of quite different nature. This time, the signs can be seen as crystal-clear carvings above the head of a female figure (perhaps a goddess).It is also clear that they are not simple artistic decorations, but form part of an inscription - a single name. The problem is, that at least two of the four signs on the Haghia Triada sealing do not admit a good reading, they are so dissimilar to anything seen on other Hieroglyphic or Linear A documents. While the insects could have been bees (contrary to the opinion of Evans, the Minoan writing systems did not have any sign depicting butterflies), there is no good explanation for the cape-like third and the snake-like fourth sign. They could have been rare alternative signs in the Hiero system (in which case the chance of decipherment is exceedingly low), or otherwise well-known signs in the Linear system, whose Hieroglyphic counterparts were not yet identified. In the latter case, we still stand a chence to decipher this name - one day perhaps, but not now.Andras Zekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15850805830621290277noreply@blogger.com0