Minoan Linear A words: 7 types of cloth on tablet HT 117 (Haghia Triada) compared with 7 types of cloth in Mycenaean Linear B:My, my, what a co-incidence? Or is it? 7 types of cloth are apparently tallied on tablet HT 117 (Haghia Triada), at least if I have translated the “correct” words corresponding to cloth types in Minoan Linear A (although I am fairly certain I have come close to the mark), and these can be compared with 7 types of cloth in Mycenaean Linear B,
although in the latter case I may have missed 1 or 2 types of cloth. At any rate, no one knows what kinds of textiles/cloth even the words in Mycenaean Linear B refer to, so what does it matter if the 7 Minoan Linear terms for cloth/textiles do not align with their supposed Mycenaean Linear B counterparts? It does not matter one jot, since we will never know what the cloth/textile types are in either syllabary. So take your pick. One is as good as the next. The main point is that we have apparently catalogued 7 major types of textiles/cloth in Minoan Linear A with a fairly high degree of certainty ( > 60 %).
Tag: Linear A
-
NEW link added: ANCIENTSCRIPTS.COM at the bottom of the page
NEW link added: ANCIENTSCRIPTS.COM at the bottom of the page: You can click on it here:
but once this post is passed, you will have to scroll down to the bottom of the page to:
Friends & Links (Bottom left)
and then click on the site’s name:
This is an extremely comprehensive site on ancient languages, Occidental and Oriental.
Share this:
-
Boolean chart of The 5 Principles of Cross-correlative Retrogressive Extrapolation from Mycenaean Linear B to Minoan Linear A
Boolean chart of The 5 Principles of Cross-correlative Retrogressive Extrapolation from Mycenaean Linear B to Minoan Linear A:
Here we see a Boolean chart of The 5 Principles of Cross-correlative Retrogressive Extrapolation from Mycenaean Linear B to Minoan Linear A. Before explaining the Boolean chart, it is highly advisable for us to review the 5 Principles of Cross-correlative Retrogressive Extrapolation from Mycenaean Linear B to Minoan Linear A, which you can read in full here:
The 5 principles applicable to the rational partial decipherment of Minoan Linear A:
for without a thorough understanding of these 5 principles, you will be unable to follow the novel methodology I have devised for the partial, not total, decipherment of Minoan Linear A à partir de (extrapolated from) Mycenaean Linear B.
Once you have carefully read over these 5 principles, the Boolean chart above should become pretty much transparent. For instance, the Minoan Linear A word puko is a perfect match for the Mycenaean Linear B word tiripode (= 100%). Likewise, the Minoan Linear A term sedina is a perfect match with Linear B selinon = celery. That is why the overlap between the two terms is illustrated as a circle within a circle (since displaying only 1 circle would not get the idea across clearly). Since Minoan Linear A qareto is very likely to correspond to Mycenaean Linear B onato = lease field, the overlap is > 75 %, and is mapped out as Sets A B & C completely overlapping in the Boolean chart. Likewise, saru = small olives in Minoan Linear A > 60 % and is again charted as Sets A B & C overlapping. On the other hand, tisa in Minoan Linear A, which apparently = amotewiya = description of pottery? in Mycenaean Linear B (though we can never be certain of this), comes in at a scalar value of < 50 %, mapped out in the Boolean chart as Sets A & B or A & C only.
In our Minoan Linear A Glossary of 110 terms,
36 terms clock in a scalar value of > 75 %
58 clock in with a scalar value of > 60 %
16 clock in with a scalar value of < 50 %
TOTAL = 110
Thus, 84 or 76 % of all the terms in the Glossary of Minoan Linear A are either extremely reliable ( > 75 %) or reasonably reliable ( > 60 %).
Share this:
-
The Minoan Linear A keyboard as designed by yours truly
The Minoan Linear A keyboard as designed by yours truly:
Share this:
-
Are we near the end of the line with our Minoan Linear A Glossary?
Are we near the end of the line with our Minoan Linear A Glossary?
Are we near the end of the line with our Minoan Linear A Glossary? With 110 terms, if we are not already there, pretty close. I can only squeeze so much juice out of an orange.
Share this:
-
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 12 & qatidate = Mycenaean Linear B erawa = olive tree(s)
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 12 & qatidate = Mycenaean Linear B erawa = olive tree(s):
On Minoan Linear A tablet HT 12, we find the word qatidate, which in all likelihood is the equivalent Mycenaean Linear B erawa = olive trees. This decipherment is substantiated by or earlier decipherment of datu = small olives. Notice the direct correlation between qatidate and datu.
This raises the scalar value of both of these translations to > 60% (very reliable).
This is term 110 I have deciphered in Minoan Linear A, more or less accurately (in this case, more).
Share this:
-
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 90 & the eponym/personal name = Sirumarita2 = Sirumaritai
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 90 & the eponym/personal name = Sirumarita2 = Sirumaritai:
On Minoan Linear A tablet we find Sirumarita2 = Sirumaritai, which very much looks like an eponym/personal name.
This is term 109 in Minoan Linear A I have deciphered more or less accurately.
Share this:
-
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 19 & dadumata = Linear B sitokowo = grain/wheat measurers?
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 19 & dadumata = Linear B sitokowo = grain/wheat measurers?
Does dadumata on Minoan Linear A tablet HT 19 = Linear B sitokowo = grain/wheat measurers? It is a long shot, but at least I am willing to take it. The likelihood that this decipherment is correct is < 50%.
This is term 108 in Minoan Linear A I have deciphered more or less accurately (in this case, less).
Share this:
-
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 40 the terms nudu*331 = Linear B rino? = flax? & kidata = Linear B dekesato = to be accepted (for delivery)
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 40 the terms nudu*331 = Linear B rino? = flax? & kidata = Linear B dekesato = to be accepted (for delivery):
On Minoan Linear A tablet HT 40 the term nudu*331 appears to mean Linear B rino? = flax, while kidata = Linear B dekesato = to be accepted (for delivery). Given that there are 201 bushel-like units, which is a moderate amount, I have interpreted nudu*331 as signifying “flax”. Flax is not as common as wheat or barley. Since the participle kidata terminates in the ultimate “ta”, it is not a past participle passive. Past participle passives in Minoan Linear B end in “na”, for instance, kiretana = “having been delivered”. Of these two words, nudu*331 is the less certain (<50% scalar value, not necessarily reliable), whereas kidata is more certain (probably 60%+ a reasonably reliable scalar value).
These two new terms are nos. 106 & 107. Decipherment is more or less certain.
Share this:
-
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 17 (Haghia Triada) & ra*164ti = approx. 5 litres (of wine)
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 17 (Haghia Triada) & ra*164ti = approx. 5 litres (of wine):
Close examination of Minoan Linear A tablet HT 17 (Haghia Triada), on which 38 units of wine + the supersyllabogram TE = tereza, which is the standard unit for liquid measurement in Minoan Linear A, appears ra*164ti = approx. 5 litres (of wine), reveals that this total (38) would amount to something in the order of 190 litres of wine, which is a pretty substantial amount. An equally close look at the heading of this tablet, the illustration of the wine magazines at Knossos, would seem to validate our findings. All we need to do is compare the amount of 190 litres or so on this tablet with the sizes of the 11 amphorae in this magazine to get a fair idea of which of these 11 amphorae is most likely to contain 190 litres or so. That is the one which I have flagged. I cannot be sure whether that amphora is the closest in size to 190 litres or so, because I have never had occasion to fill any amphora of any size with wine. Perhaps one of our archaeologist friends can carry out this experiment (or may have already done so for a certain amount of litre-like units of measurement for amphorae). Such a person would be in a solid position to enlighten us on this account. I am thinking, for instance, of our archaeologist colleague Rita Roberts, who may be willing to fill a few small amphorae with 190 litres of water until she finds the one that does not spill over... if she can find enough small amphorae to carry out such an experiment. Just a thought.
Caveat: as is the usual case, we can never be sure what the standard liquid unit of measurement for wine or other liquids was in Minoan or Mycenaean times, particularly at Knossos, but this approximation will do.
This is term 105 I have deciphered, more or less accurately in Minoan Linear A. Since I am reasonably confident of this definition, I am assigning it a scalar value of 60% +.
For the table of standard dry and liquid units of measurement in Mycenaean Linear B by Andras Zeke, click on the figure below:
Share this:
-
Minoan Linear A tablet KH 10 (Khania/Chania) & akipiete = Mycenaean Linear B kekemena = “common, shared, allotted”
Minoan Linear A tablet KH 10 (Khania/Chania) & akipiete = Mycenaean Linear B kekemena = “common, shared, allotted”:
Minoan Linear A tablet KH 10 from Khania/Chania contains the word akipiete, which is very likely the equivalent of Mycenaean Linear B kekemena = “common, shared, allotted”. Note the number 90 following the number of “bushel-like” units of wheat. That number is too small to refer to anything other than something rather small in common, or if you like, shared or allotted to an equally small number of farmers or (more likely) tenant farmers sharing a rather small plot of land = ktoina. I had previously defined akipiete as “harvest”, but such an interpretation is quite out of the question in light of the small no. of “bushel-like” units of wheat = 90. Such a piddly amount of wheat would never be sufficient to victualize all of the inhabitants of Khania/Chania, not even for a month! So we have no alternative but to greatly reduce the number of people who can reasonably be fed by 90 bushels to a few farmers or more likely tenant farmers on a small plot of land.
It is crucial to understand that the number of items following any object on a Minoan Linear A tablet is a critical factor determining the definition of said object. This factor will become clearer when I publish my draft article on our Minoan Linear A Glossary on academia.edu.
This is term 105 I have deciphered, more or less accurately. I feel comfortable enough assigning a scalar value of 60%+ to this term, indicating a reasonable degree of accuracy.
Share this:
-
Minoan Linear A tablet Zakros ZA 11 & kupa or sa*301ri = planter
Minoan Linear A tablet Zakros ZA 11 & kupa or sa*301ri = planter:
On Minoan Linear A tablet Zakros ZA 11, we run across 2 terms which are likely to mean “planter”, kupa or sa*301ri. The problem is, which one does mean this? I really had no choice but too tag both of these words as candidates for “planter”. This predicament has faced me more than once in attempting to attribute suitable meanings to Minoan words. However, a decision must be made. In this case, the more appropriate term for “planter” appears to be sa*301ri rather than kupa, since the latter is more likely to be feminine.
Whichever of these two terms is the more a propos remains an open question. At any rate, the term is no. 104 in our Glossary of Minoan Linear A.
Share this:
-
Minoan Linear A jedi = Mycenaean Linear B atoroqo = man/men, human
Minoan Linear A jedi = Mycenaean Linear B atoroqo = man/men, human:
After wracking my brains out for at least 3 months, I have finally come to the belated conclusion that the Minoan Linear A word jedi = Mycenaean Linear B atoroqo = man/men, human. There is a reasonably good chance that this is correct (60% +), given the following factors:
(a) On the first tablet, HT 8, jedi immediately precedes the ID for “olives or olive oil” followed by the supersyllabogram KI, which almost certainly stands for kireta2 (kiretai) = Mycenaean Linear B apudosi = “delivery”. So the phrase appears to mean, “One man is preparing to deliver 10 (amphorae) of olive oil”.
(b) On the verso of the second tablet, HT 122, there are 40 jedi = Linear B atoroqo = man/men, human who are apparently counting the crop yield (qaqaru), where the total (kuro) of all items accounted for on this tablet is 65.
Previous researchers have attributed a personal name to Jedi, but that interpretation is implausible.
This is term 103 I have deciphered, more or less accurately.
Share this:
-
Does this Minoan Linear A tablet refer to the Linear A word karopa3 (karopai) for a kylix?
Does this Minoan Linear A tablet refer to the Linear A word karopa3 (karopai) for a kylix?
Share this:
-
A Minoan Linear A tablet from Archanes, Crete with the toponym Akanu
A Minoan Linear A tablet from Archanes, Crete with the toponym Akanu:
Here we have a Minoan Linear A tablet from Archanes, Crete with the toponym Akanu = modern day Archanes. This is Linear A term 101 in our Glossary of Minoan Linear A.
Share this:
-
Mycenaean Linear B tablet KN 160a J j 11 as a template for Minoan Linear A large unit of liquid measurement, tereza
Mycenaean Linear B tablet KN 160a J j 11 as a template for Minoan Linear A large unit of liquid measurement, tereza:
Mycenaean Linear B tablet KN 160a J j 11 serves as a useful template for Minoan Linear A large unit of liquid measurement, tereza, which was one of the very first words I deciphered with reasonable accuracy back in May 2016. Moreover, the supersyllabogram DI following the ideogram (ID) for “wine” specifically references dipa, the Mycenaean word for “cup”, which in turn appears as supa3 (supai) for a small cup (300 of them) and pazeqe for a small cup without handles (3,000 of them) on Linear A tablet HT 31, which we have already translated in its entirety. In addition, this particular Mycenaean Linear B tablet on wines is information-rich.
Share this:
-
Minoan Linear A ADU on tablets dealing with grain & wheat refer to the TOTAL harvest = term 100
Minoan Linear A ADU on tablets dealing with grain & wheat refer to the TOTAL harvest:
Minoan Linear A ADU on tablets dealing with grain & wheat apparently refer to the TOTAL harvest. After spending the past three months wracking my brains out over this term, ADU, I have finally settled on its being the approximate, if not exact, equivalent of the Mycenaean Linear B terms, toso, tosa, as illustrated in the figure above. All this amounts to nothing more or less than taking into account the total harvest of grains or wheat, as seen on tablets HT 92, with no fewer than 680 “bushel-like” units of wheat! I say “bushel-like” because there is no way on earth that we in the twenty-first century can ever know what the standard unit for measuring wheat was for the Minoans. But there can be little doubt but that these tablets all deal with the standard unit for measuring grans and wheat, because the first two use the term tereza and the last one reza, which are the actual Minoan standard units for measuring large quantities. On the first two tablets (HT 92 & HT 133) the total number (ADU) refers to the actual large units of wheat measured (something like our modern “bushels”). But on Linear tablet HT 92. we are faced with a different scenario. Here ADU refers to all the men who are carrying out the measurement of 55 large “bushel-like” units of grains or wheat. So it is quite reasonable to assume that the occupational title (so to speak) of these folks would be something like surveyor or comptroller, since these are in fact the métiers of people who undertake such measurements. But remember. We are not just dealing with some of the comptrollers measuring the 55 large units of wheat. We are dealing with all 20 of them. In other words, ADU is the approximate, if not exact, equivalent of the Mycenaean Linear B term toso (masc. sing. & pl. & neut. sing.) and tosa (neut. pl.), which correspond precisely with the same forms of the ancient Greek words meaning all you see in the figure above.
This brings the number of Minoan Linear A words I have deciphered, more or less accurately, to an even 100.
Share this:
-
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 128 (Haghia Triada) & 2 new eponyms, Turunuseme & Watumare
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 128 (Haghia Triada) & 2 new eponyms, Turunuseme & Watumare:
After carefully examining Minoan Linear A tablet HT 128 (Haghia Triada) several times, I have come to the belated conclusion that Turunuseme & Watumare are eponyms, the names of the farmers or farm tenants who are responsible for the harvesting and storage of grain on this tablet. My conclusion is perhaps bolstered by the fact that the ideogram for “man” [3] appears on the last line (b.1). I have already tentatively deciphered the terms pa3ni (paini) & kunisu as possibly meaning “an amphora for the storage of grain” and “bushels” respectively. But these latter two translations are not very reliable at the time of this writing, and so they are wide open to re-interpretation.
This brings the number of Minoan Linear A words I have deciphered, more or less accurately, to 97.
Share this:
-
What is the Minoan Linear A word for “figs”? It only appears as a logogram on Linear A tablets, so we do not know how it might be spelled. However, informed speculation leads me…
What is the Minoan Linear A word for “figs”? It only appears as a logogram on Linear A tablets, so we do not know how it might be spelled. However, informed speculation leads me...
What is the Minoan Linear A word for “figs”? As it only appears as a logogram on Linear A tablets and is never spelled out, we do not know its orthography. Or so it appears. However, informed speculation leads me to infer the following from what we already know about the syllabogram-cum-logogram for “figs” in Mycenaean Linear B, which just so happens to be exactly the same syllabogram/logogram as that for “figs” in Minoan Linear A. All this in spite of the fact that the Mycenaean Greek word for “figs” is suza, which is the same word as in many other ancient Greek dialects. So what is going on here? There is no doubt but that Mycenaean Linear B inherited the logogram for “figs” from Minoan Linear A. They simply lifted it lock-stock-and-barrel from the earlier syllabary. But why? Why didn’t they turn to their own word for “figs”, suza, and use its first syllabogram, SU, as the syllabogram/logogram for “figs”? It seems passingly strange. But is it?
Turning to our Glossary of 95 Minoan Linear words, we set our sights on examining Minoan Linear A words which are typically diminutives. This we do because after all, figs are very small; hence, we can infer that the word referencing them, beginning with the syllabogram NI, should display orthographic characteristics reminiscent of other Minoan Linear A diminutives. Let us examine the latter in turn. In the Glossary, we find:
dumitatira2 (dumitatirai) = right or inner spindle wheel on one side of the distaff
karopa3 (karopai) = kylix (with two handles & much smaller than a pithos)
kireta2 (kiritai) = delivery = Linear B apudosis
kita2 (kitai) = scented olive oil?
pimitatira2 (pimitatirai) = left or outer spindle wheel on one side of the distaff
sara2 (sarai) = small unit of measurement: dry approx. 1 kg., liquid approx. 1 litre
supa3 (supai) = small cup = Linear B dipa mewiyo
All of the terms above refer to small, i.e. diminutive, items. Hence, it is reasonable to assume that the Minoan Linear A word for “figs” may quite possibly be similar to any of the above. There are 3 diminutive ultimates in Minoan Linear A, pa3 (pai) and ra2 (rai) and ta2 (tai). Thus, the Minoan Linear A word for “figs” is likely to be one of these alternatives:
nipai3 (nipai)
-or-
nira2 (nirai)
-or-
nita2 (nitai)
However, the last alternative (nita2/nitai) seems to be the least likely candidate. This is because one of the terms ending in ta2 (tai), kireta2 (kiritai) = delivery = Linear B apudosis is abstract, while the other, kita2 (kitai) = scented olive oil? , apparently describes a something to which size cannot be directly attributed. One can have a little bit, a moderate amount, or a great deal of scented olive oil. The amount cannot be pinned down. This attribute is semi-abstract in and of itself, at least is kita2 (kitai) = scented olive oil. I cannot be sure of this meaning.
So it appears we are now down to two alternatives for the orthography of “figs” in Minoan Linear A, i.e.
nipai3 (nipai)
-or-
nira2 (nirai)
Of course, we can never be certain which of these 3 alternatives might hit the proverbial target. We still can never really know what the Minoan term for “figs” is. But there are times when speculation leads us to a leap of faith which just might be grounded somewhere in the realm of reality.
As for the rationale behind the Mycenaean Linear B scribes
to retain the syllabogram/logogram NI from Minoan Linear A, we shall never know why they chose to do that. It may have been a matter of expediency, or it may have been that the Minoans at Knossos had used the word for “figs” beginning with NI so intensively that the Mycenaean scribes could see no point changing the syllabogram/logogram NI, or it may have been for some other less obvious, possibly esoteric, reason. Yet, we must keep firmly in mind that the Mycenaean word for figs was suza, regardless of their decision to keep on relying on the independent supersyllabogram NI to represent “figs”, as seen in this Linear B tablet:
Share this:
-
A series of 4 Minoan Linear A tablets from Phaistos
A series of 4 Minoan Linear A tablets from Phaistos: All four:
Each one in turn:
Share this:
You must be logged in to post a comment.