Cypro-Minoan writing deciphered (original) (raw)

Abstract

This work will easily be understood after the reader familiarizes with our previous works on the Aegean syllabic scripts or simply with the basic principles explained there, namely that: -the Minoan civilization was created by Sumerians who settled mainly on Crete since the very beginning of the 3rd millennium BC, when the most important Sumerian city in Mesopotamia was Uruk and their most revered God was An. -since the settlement of Sumerians on Crete and Cyprus, starting about 3000 years BC, the Sumerian pictography evolved into two types of syllabic script, both of them called ProtoLinear (PL); there were two types of PL script, because the Sumerian language evolved differently in Cyprus than in Crete, so each type of PL was adapted to the local dialect; consequently we have two types of ProtoLinear: the Cypriot PL and the Cretan PL. -the PL script in both its types was an ingenious invention because it was the easiest script to learn; actually a fluent speaker of Sumerian did not even have to go to school to learn reading, because the name and phonetic value of each sign was the name of the thing depicted by the sign, and all signs were readily recognizable by Sumerians; consequently, the PL signs remained always recognizable by Sumerians no matter how long time would elapse; on the other hand, the PL script used by non-Sumerians naturally changed by the passage of time, the signs were simplified and distorted as for non-Sumerians there was no connection between sign-image and sign-name. -in other words, PL was, by definition, the script used by Sumerians, while the same script used by other nations was not PL, but some other kind of script, such as LA, LB, LC, LCGr.

Figures (15)

A TABLE SUMMARIZING THE ATTESTED SYLLABOGRAMS OF CypPL A table of signs which probably existed in CypPL follows, where signs that probably did not exist in CypPL are in blue coloured boxes; other signs appearing in the table might have been absent too in CypPL, especially signs of the columns I and K, which are known from CrPL. Documented signs are mentioned with their pictorial origin. (Where a sign is missing in a box we may tentatively presume that it was same as the correcnondino cion in Cretan PT ).

A TABLE SUMMARIZING THE ATTESTED SYLLABOGRAMS OF CypPL A table of signs which probably existed in CypPL follows, where signs that probably did not exist in CypPL are in blue coloured boxes; other signs appearing in the table might have been absent too in CypPL, especially signs of the columns I and K, which are known from CrPL. Documented signs are mentioned with their pictorial origin. (Where a sign is missing in a box we may tentatively presume that it was same as the correcnondino cion in Cretan PT ).

THE ORIGIN (PICTORIAL AND PHONETIC) OF THE LCGr SIGNS As most CypPL signs exist in CrPL too, for most signs of LCGr we shall only briefly mention what they originally depicted, and the homomorph in CrPL. (“Homomorph” means a sign of the same pictographic origin). On the other hand it will be clear that for some syllables CypPL used totally different signs, the origin of which we shall investigate here:

THE ORIGIN (PICTORIAL AND PHONETIC) OF THE LCGr SIGNS As most CypPL signs exist in CrPL too, for most signs of LCGr we shall only briefly mention what they originally depicted, and the homomorph in CrPL. (“Homomorph” means a sign of the same pictographic origin). On the other hand it will be clear that for some syllables CypPL used totally different signs, the origin of which we shall investigate here:

fnl O taravl Kavaijamana KO Again this inscription has reasons to be read in a Semitic language: starting with the preposition “ana”, and “panamo” starts with pan- which : probably the Semitic word for “face; in the presence of...”. This inscription is read from right to left. Indeed, the longer inscriptions in LCGr a1 written from right to left as the Wikipedia template says, but the shorter inscriptions are written from left to right and that was the origin direction of writing for the LCGr as also for all the Minoan scripts of Crete and Cyprus. LCGr inscriptions were also written from top to bottotr and in other ways, as around an image on coins. An example of left to right inscription is given in Wikipedia itse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypriot_syllabary#/media/File:National Museum of Beirut %E2%80%93 Cypriot syllabary (Paphian).jpg) ee ee oe : on SS A ee en ee eS Ae a Se ee a that is “Samnathos(?) katetheke taj theoj; in tukhaj” (Samnathos, or Samanathos or the like, a man’s Hellenized non-Greek name, likely fro Semitic Sham- “heaven”) deposited (this stele as a religious offering) to the Goddess; in good fortune). https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Amathous_Eteocypriot_inscription.jpg)

fnl O taravl Kavaijamana KO Again this inscription has reasons to be read in a Semitic language: starting with the preposition “ana”, and “panamo” starts with pan- which : probably the Semitic word for “face; in the presence of...”. This inscription is read from right to left. Indeed, the longer inscriptions in LCGr a1 written from right to left as the Wikipedia template says, but the shorter inscriptions are written from left to right and that was the origin direction of writing for the LCGr as also for all the Minoan scripts of Crete and Cyprus. LCGr inscriptions were also written from top to bottotr and in other ways, as around an image on coins. An example of left to right inscription is given in Wikipedia itse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypriot\_syllabary#/media/File:National Museum of Beirut %E2%80%93 Cypriot syllabary (Paphian).jpg) ee ee oe : on SS A ee en ee eS Ae a Se ee a that is “Samnathos(?) katetheke taj theoj; in tukhaj” (Samnathos, or Samanathos or the like, a man’s Hellenized non-Greek name, likely fro Semitic Sham- “heaven”) deposited (this stele as a religious offering) to the Goddess; in good fortune). https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Amathous\_Eteocypriot\_inscription.jpg)

Key takeaways

sparkles

AI

  1. The text deciphers Cypro-Minoan writing, revealing its Sumerian origins and script evolution.
  2. ProtoLinear scripts evolved in Cyprus and Crete, adapting to local dialects with distinct signs.
  3. Cypriot and Cretan ProtoLinear differed, particularly in phonetic representation and syllabic structure.
  4. The document highlights the significance of pictorial origins in understanding script signs.
  5. Numerical systems in Sumerian scripts, such as the 60x60 base, influenced Cypro-Minoan writing.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.