History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login


Forum LockedMinoan civilization originated in Anatolia!

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 8>
Author
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Minoan civilization originated in Anatolia!
    Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 02:56
Originally posted by CiegaSordomud

The 'mainstream' is the establishment that publishes information in layman books and other popular media only based on select academic sources. There are many scholars, researchers and archeologists who do work in different fields, and im sure they dont care about public opinion just their work and making a living. But the industry itself pushes only select ideas, sometimes regardless of their validity or value, out to the public. Isnt that simple to understand?
No, this is not mainstream. You don't read in layman books and popular media about geminate consonants, athematic suffixes, sygmatic nominatives, and plenty of such things but there are mainstream beliefs, hypotheses, theories on them. A part of the mainstream scholarship gets popularized, but most part doesn't. And a lot of fringe theories get popularized, too. In consequence the most popular beliefs are not always the mainstream beliefs (where in the latter case I relate the mainstream to the community of scholars, of experts).
 
Which is why we have many magazines, books, documentaries that talk about history in vague catchwords such as "Eurasian", "Indo-Iranian", "Scythian", "Kurgan" just to get certain individuals tingly.
You got it wrong. Perhaps they are catchwords for the layman (like you seem to be), but for scholars they are concepts, and are anything but vague (well, generally; there is always room for incompetence)
 
So they talk about the connection between people a quarter of the world away occuring in a short time frame, Tocharians and Indo-Europeans. But forbid you from even hypothesizing that groups sharing similar elements and living right next to each other, Hurrians and Sumerians, might have a relation the same way different IE groups have with one another. So for their pet IE theories they create large "trees" that connect distant groups/languages etc. (which in most cases is fine), but if you do the same with other groups then there's "not any shred of evidence". Just because 80% of IE/Aryan theories are parroting the same line for decades and have accumulated so much BS, you cant ignore newer information and theories that bring forth new ideas. 
You don't seem to understand much of the PIE theories (and I remind you this is not the topic of this thread, you seem to have a tendency to talk about Iranian issues). No one forbids you to hypothesise anything, but the mainstream PIE theories are more than a hypothesis. If you want to discuss about PIE topics join this thread: http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=4331 
Hurrian and Sumerian, linguistically, are very different, much more different than Tocharian and Celtic. And indeed, AFAIK, there's no evidence to connect Hurrian to Sumerian.
 
Compare the amount of occurences different terms appear in Jstor, lets see on what the majority puts more enphasis on. The mythtical Scythians, or actual provable archeological, ethnic groups and sites.


Results 1 - 10 of about 2,200 from jstor.org for Scythian

Results 1 - 5 of 5 from jstor.org for Jeitun

Results 1 - 10 of about 25 from jstor.org for Marhasi

Results 1 - 10 of about 92 from jstor.org for Oghuz

Results 1 - 10 of 10 from jstor.org for Wusun
Nice try. Most of the hits are about Scythian arts or other topics. If you'd compare with hits on Roman (over 100,000, albeit not all about the Romans from Antiquity) you'd see Scythian is rather a peripheral topic and the legend of Scythians (I assume you mean Herodotus' account) is even more peripherical. Thus your earlier claim about the "legend of Scythians taking a large chunk of the dialogue" rests on no evidence.
 
Your parallelisms are invalid as there are not so many Middle East or Asian studies journals enrolled in JStor (and Scythians are a topic for a journal like JRS or Classical Philology or Greece&Rome, but Oghuz or Wusun aren't).


Edited by Chilbudios - 26-Oct-2008 at 03:00
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 11:03
Originally posted by CiegaSordomud

Linguists who only seek out Indo-European sources as explanations are dishonest, especially in Anatolia where other languages predate IE. Infact, these pre-IE languages influenced early Indo-European speakers who were moving into the region from the west. Minoan and Etruscan are not IE, they are related to Hurrian; both derive from the same language family as Sumerian. The mainstream considers all these languages "isolates," to maintain their pet theories, and not have to revise decades of their misinformation to the public.

Sumerian         Minoan          English

BAR-LU              MA-RU           wool

SIR                    SIRUTE         raze

GU                     KU-RO          totality

PA                     PA-DE           father

(DAM-BAN-DA)   DA-MA-TE      (concubine) Demeter, her main epithet was mistress

http://www.smso.net/Linear_A
http://home.comcast.net/~foxvog/Glossary.pdf

Furthermore, any similarity with IE words near Anatolia or Armenia is based on an earlier substratum (Hurrian). Including Armenian, which is almost blatant because a prominent Hurrian kingdom, Urartu, was located there.


Excuse me mate, but you say that linguists who seek IE sources are dishonest and you make a link to a site quoting the Gareth Owens!!!

Furthermore, the theories suggested on the first link are about Luwian, Indo-Iranian on the IE side and Phoenician on the non-IE side. In that sense neither Cyrus has been wrong with his input.

I agree with Chibuldios that we assume things about Linear A, based on the phonetic values of Linear B. Probably, many symbols have the same values but not all of them. We might be reading it completely wrong.

Everyone have some suggestion. I'm not saying some of them are more correct than others as long as they use a credible methodology. Evans suggested that Carian was the closest language to the Minoan. His and Ventris suggestions are not based just on the questionable reading of the Linear A tablets but also in the few Minoan inscriptions written with Greek letters, which we know how to read. The Greek letter inscriptions do point to an IE language. Strabo, noted that the Carian language contained many Greek words. Those words were probably not Greek, but words from a older language that was a common ancestor for both Greek and Carian.

Also, considering the fact that a big part of the Greek population do have roots from the people living in the Aegian, i would expect to find more traces of Semitic languages in Greek, rather than a large number of words that relate to the Anatolian languages. Semitic words do exist in Greek, but the examples are few. To compare the number of words of Semitic origin in Greek with the number of words of Anatolian origin is out of the question. The large number of synonyms in the Greek language also explain the pre-Greek languages. There are more that 1 word for each meaning, simply because in the second millenium BC, in parallel with Greek, the aegian languages were spoken too. That's why you have words like Pelagos and Thalassa, Petra and Lithos, Phos and Lyks, Gis and Chthon.



SÃ¥ nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 12:31
Here's a good introduction on Linear A, and also a nice collection of texts.
 
 
I agree with Chibuldios that we assume things about Linear A, based on the phonetic values of Linear B. Probably, many symbols have the same values but not all of them. We might be reading it completely wrong.
Often this reading is marked with a name of its own, John Younger calls it Linear AB, Yves Duhoux abbreviates it LA > LB (where LA and LB stand for Linear A and B respectively).
 
Besides word-by-word comparing, there are few other approaches on decipherment, which IMO have better chances to provide good results.
- the identification of each symbol with a syllabe based on some independent method (e.g. acrophonic principle or similar connections: see Younger's example with the cat and the cow - the Minoan syllabe might not the be the actual AB syllabe, but it may be a mV or mVV type of syllabe)
- determining the meaning from context (like the aforementioned KU-RO apparently meaning "total")
- analysing the grammar, the morphology - in some votive tablets some words occur in several different forms; this type of analysis may be more suitable for comparision with other known languages, but we must keep in mind that there's a real possibility that no other language we know of is close to Minoan, case in which all parallelisms will be a dead-end
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 13:40
Yes that's a good link Chibuldios. It summarizes most of it.

In order not to be missunderstood, I do not dismiss the Semitic theory. It is a suggested theory, that has some basis. However, I'm more convinced with the Anatolian character of the Minoan, because the words suggested link with more languages of IE origin. Also as I mentioned before, statistically in Greek, the remnants of the pre-Greek languages are not Semitic.

Also, Miletus was a city founded by Cretans. The native language of the citizens (before complete Hellenization by the Ionians) was Carian and we do have written records of that. We also have Linear A tablets from Miletus.

http://allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=25562


SÃ¥ nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
CiegaSordomud View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 07-Aug-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40
Post Options Post Options   Quote CiegaSordomud Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 15:50
Linear B syllabics have been useful, we have at least 3 indications of geographic names. Two of them are Ida in Crete and Hurrian town Tursa (TURUSA), probably relating to the Tyrrhenians and Sea People.

After decades of the same IE and Semitic theories to decipher Linear A virtually no progress was made. Its time too look at the obvious agglutinative forms and other references that point to a proto-Tyrrhenian/Hurrian origin.


Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 16:36
Originally posted by CiegaSordomud

Linear B syllabics have been useful, we have at least 3 indications of geographic names. Two of them are Ida in Crete and Hurrian town Tursa (TURUSA), probably relating to the Tyrrhenians and Sea People.

After decades of the same IE and Semitic theories to decipher Linear A virtually no progress was made. Its time too look at the obvious agglutinative forms and other references that point to a proto-Tyrrhenian/Hurrian origin.
There's nothing known about a proto-Tyrrhenian language, so I don't see how one could relate Linear A to it. If by Tyrrhenian you mean a language family encompassing Etruscan, then this obviously is unrelated to Hurrian.
 
As for Hurrian, it should be noted that all Linear B and AB syllabes are in V or CV form, whereas Hurrian cuneiform had also VC syllabes. And the only argument you brought for a Hurrian connection was this dubious word-list : http://web.archive.org/web/20061001130423/http://www.anistor.co.hol.gr/english/enback/m992.htm
 
For what's worth the parallels with Luwian and Hittite yielded more impressive results (touching even grammar issues).
Back to Top
CiegaSordomud View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 07-Aug-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40
Post Options Post Options   Quote CiegaSordomud Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 17:40
Proto-Tyrrhenian in terms of the non-IE languages spoken in eastern and southern Anatolia prior to large wave of migration from that region into other parts of the Mediterranean. We cannot apply phonology that was only suited for studying IE languages to others. You have to consider Hurrian as their root language with other influences, like Luwian and Latin along the way. This is not the "easy" theory, there is still a lot of work needed for Hurrian itself. And there is nothing "impressive" about those IE theories for Linear A, even the IE faithful admit they still don't know what's the language, they only "suggest."  Well, let them waste their time trying, it wont change a single thing.

Inform yourself more about Hurrian, not just the main topic, but the smaller details which reveal a lot more than an IE-only emphasis.

http://www.nostratic.ru/arc/Untitled12.pdf


Edited by CiegaSordomud - 27-Oct-2008 at 17:42
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 18:05
Originally posted by CiegaSordomud

Proto-Tyrrhenian in terms of the non-IE languages spoken in eastern and southern Anatolia prior to large wave of migration from that region into other parts of the Mediterranean.
There's no evidence for such a claim.
 
We cannot apply phonology that was only suited for studying IE languages to others.
What are you talking about? The syllabe phonology (if this is what you meant) is not at all "only suited for studying IE languages".
 
You have to consider Hurrian as their root language with other influences, like Luwian and Latin along the way. This is not the "easy" theory, there is still a lot of work needed for Hurrian itself.
No one has to support a theory if there are no evidences. If a theory is not "easy" then it means it's rather improbable.
 
And there is nothing "impressive" about those IE theories for Linear A, even the IE faithful admit they still don't know what's the language, they only "suggest." 
Actually I said "more impressive" and that's easily provable because the suggested links between Minoan and Anatolian IE languages are far more substantial than between Minoan  and Hurrian or other similar claims. Of course, it may be merely some coincidences and Minoan be an isolate, but the issue at stake here is why to accept a relation with Hurrian and not with some other Anatolian IE languages?
 
Inform yourself more about Hurrian, not just the main topic, but the smaller details which reveal a lot more than an IE-only emphasis.

http://www.nostratic.ru/arc/Untitled12.pdf
 
Such links suggest you don't understand much of what's written there ... but suit yourself. This is not even an article about Hurrian, but about the name of a deity and its posisble origins in several languages (two main hypotheses are analysed - Hurrian and Semitic). It touches the issue of interpreting Minoan as a Semitic or Semitic-influenced language. It also mentions Hurrian loan-words in Hittite, which suggest, contrary to your claims, that few Hurrian words in Linear A could be interpreted as evidence that Minoan is actually an IE Anatolian language split after receiving few borrowings from Hurrian. Tricky, huh?


Edited by Chilbudios - 27-Oct-2008 at 18:11
Back to Top
CiegaSordomud View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 07-Aug-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40
Post Options Post Options   Quote CiegaSordomud Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 20:28
Lets clarify that the IE-theory proponents tried to use the argument that Minoan must have come from previously unknown IE branch .Its not possible because that would imply an unquestionable connection to root IE words, none which worked. If you look at all the examples provided, its all speculation. If not lets see some examples of the few Minoan  samples matching with Hittite??? Comparing Hittite or any IE language to Minoan has been inconclusive, lets get past that point for once or else it will become repetitive.

On that link you will find some good information on Hurrian words and forms that were prominently used in the region. If we aren't IE zombies, we can confidently conclude that the users of Linear A had just as easy access to the Hurrian as the Hittite did, but the fact that Linear A is not matching with IE gives us another clue that it might actually be a source of Hurrian itself (in this case to the Greeks instead of the Hittite).

When people become more learned they can tell the forms used in Linear A that correspond with common Hurrian ones. An example this mysterious first segment of a 'libation'.

a-ta-i-*301-wa-ja o-su-qa-re ja-sa-sa-ra-me...

Adani (stool in a regular sense, but "the throne" when referring to deities)

-wa (Hurrian dative suffix, "goes to")

Ja ("Deity", probably intermediate between Etruscan Ais and Hurrian Ya
)

O-Su-Ka (Hurrian Sauska)

-re (Hurrian commitative suffix, "along with")

Sa-Sa-Ra (variety of the name Ishara)

-me (-ne, Hurrian article suffix, simply denotes "The")

This segment translates as, The throne goes to the deities Sauska and Ishara...
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 20:33
I believe Chibuldios has covered some important issues.

My add would be the following:

a) The genetic research was made on living people and samples from neolithic settlements. The Turkish contibution consists of samples taken from areas where people like the Luwians, Carians, Hittites, Lydians etc lived. Those people were not Semitic.

b) As I posted earlier, Linear A is not found only in Crete but in the Turkish coast as well. Specifically in areas where Anatolian languages were spoken. I don't have samples of those texts, but two things are possible: I) The tablets contain words found in Crete which makes Carian a language that evolved from Minoan, II) The Carians, like the Greeks adopted the Linear A script to write their own anatolian language.

c) Cretans migrated to the Balkan mainland as far as Macedonia. 2/3rds of Western Chalkidiki was predominately Bottiean (Cretan) and later Chalkidean. It is also an area of early writtings, that reveal various people living side by side (Cretans, Euboans, Macedonians, Ionians, Thracians and Carians [Athos peninsula]). Except from Greek, Carian has been recorded, probably Thracian too, but no semitic in any form (words, placenames, personal names). Other places nearby would be Pieria, Emathia and the city of Idomaenae (from the Cretan idomeneas), where again no linguistic or material culture traces point to a Semitic precence.

d) Another migration of Cretans, is the one in Orchomenos, Beottia. On the other side of Beottia the Gefyraeoi lived, who are identified as Phoenician people, unlike the Bottians of Orchomenos. 

e) Now i have a question. Can theories like the one of Cyrus Gordon, render possible sentenses in Linear A, like the ones rendered with the help of Indoeuropean languages?


SÃ¥ nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
CiegaSordomud View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 07-Aug-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40
Post Options Post Options   Quote CiegaSordomud Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 20:41
The Carian argument is weak because its only based on speculation what Carian is, which at this point is anything someone "suggests" without providing adequate detail.

If you are really interested of where Minoan might have originated, search for Kizzuwatna and focus on the non-Luwian elements.
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 20:53
I still see examples of single words. Moreover those words are proposed to cognate with single syllables. That could produce combinations of cognates in a large variety of languages.

Contrary, with the help of many early IE languages you can render possible translations in more than one tablet. Examples follow:

AP Za 2 (GORILA 4, 1982, 4)

U-NA-KA-NA-SI. I-PI-NI-MA . SI-RU-TE. KU-PA-NI-TU-NI-TE
PI-MI-NA-TE . I-NA-JA-RE-TA-QA

Give victory destroyer Iphinama and strong and holy Kubaba(Cybele?).

KO Za 1 (GORILA 4, 1982, 18)
A-TA-I-A301-WA-JA . TU-RU-SA . DU-PE2-RE . I-DA-A . U-NA-
KA-NA-SI. I-PI-NA-MA. SI-RU-TE

Astarti mistress dupere (another epithet of the godness) of Ida and Ifinama the destroyer, give [us] victory.

Turusa is compared to the Hittite Turwana, which is the feminine equivalent of Greek Tyrannos.

There are more inscriptions relating to the same context.




SÃ¥ nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 20:54
Originally posted by CiegaSordomud

The Carian argument is weak because its only based on speculation what Carian is, which at this point is anything someone "suggests" without providing adequate detail.

If you are really interested of where Minoan might have originated, search for Kizzuwatna and focus on the non-Luwian elements.


What Carian is? Carian is a written language that appears in billingual documents, therefore we have safe translations of the texts.


SÃ¥ nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 21:07
Also, I've been using this map over and over again. It is based on Palmers hypothesis of the Anatolian invasion of Greece.

Look at the placenames in Crete. They point clearly to Luwian origin.



Specifically, the -ssos is possesive form of "male" objects while -ssa are possesives of feminine ones.

Parnassos in Crete is the same name of the mountain where Delphi relyes in the mainland and renders litterarly into the Luwian Parna (house), meaning "our house".

Thalassa in Greek is a synomym of Pelagos and would render as Alas (Alas = Gk. Salt, Alat = Lw Salt ) -ssa (our salt).

Melissa renders directly to the Luwian word for honey "melit" (Gk. Meli) and means our honey (bee in Greek).

Ierissos, in Chalkidike renders to "our holy" from Greek Ieron and Carian Jeru which means holy.

Kissamos in Crete can be found as Kissabos (alt. Ossa) in the borders of Thessaly and Macedonia.

Therissos in Crete has again the typical -ssos ending.

Tylissos needs no comments...Just a quick look on Athenian pre-Ionian placenames solves a lot.

There are hundreds of placenames to pick up...


Edited by Flipper - 27-Oct-2008 at 21:28


SÃ¥ nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Oct-2008 at 21:23
Originally posted by CiegaSordomud

Lets clarify that the IE-theory proponents tried to use the argument that Minoan must have come from previously unknown IE branch .Its not possible because that would imply an unquestionable connection to root IE words, none which worked. If you look at all the examples provided, its all speculation. If not lets see some examples of the few Minoan  samples matching with Hittite??? Comparing Hittite or any IE language to Minoan has been inconclusive, lets get past that point for once or else it will become repetitive.
Scholars as Leonard Robert Palmer suggested Minoan is actually a IE language from the IE Anatolian branch (therefore your "clarification" is an erroneous claim) and several Linear A words were succesfully connected with Luwian or Hittite words, but as I already said not only words but also morphology and grammar. The examples provided are speculative, but speculative are the connection with Hurrian and all word-by-word parallels
 
If you want to see Minoan vs IE Anatolian samples read scholarship. A sketchy bibliography:
 
L. R. Palmer, "Luwian and Linear A" in Transactions of the Philological Society, 1958
Jan Best, "The Language of Linear A" in Jan Best, Fred Woudhuizen (eds.), Lost languages from the Mediteranean, 1989
Anna Morpurgo Davies, "The Linguistic Evidence: Is There Any?" in Gerald Cadogan (ed.), The End of the Early Bronze Age in the Aegean, 1986
Yves Duhoux, "Liniar A" in A. F. Christidis (ed.), A History of Ancient Greek From the Beginnings to Late Antiquity, 2007
 
On that link you will find some good information on Hurrian words and forms that were prominently used in the region. If we aren't IE zombies, we can confidently conclude that the users of Linear A had just as easy access to the Hurrian as the Hittite did, but the fact that Linear A is not matching with IE gives us another clue that it might actually be a source of Hurrian itself (in this case to the Greeks instead of the Hittite).
I'm not a IE zombie and I can't agree with your conclusion and another non-IE-zombie, John Younger, happening to be also a scholar also disagrees with you: "Since Crete appears to have been deliberately colonized in developed Neolithic, probably from SW Anatolia, it would seem logical to assume that the Minoan language was related to one of the Indo-Hittite dialects, most probably Luvian" - I already linked this material, but you failed to notice and/or read it.
Actually except for a handful of scholars, most do not give an extraordinary credit to the IE hypothesis, however I couldn't find so far scholarly support for your claims.
 
Václav Blažek' article gives little information on Hurrian, your assessment rather shows a low standard from your side. As proven by the following quote:
 
When people become more learned they can tell the forms used in Linear A that correspond with common Hurrian ones. An example this mysterious first segment of a 'libation'.

a-ta-i-*301-wa-ja o-su-qa-re ja-sa-sa-ra-me...

Adani (stool in a regular sense, but "the throne" when referring to deities)

-wa (Hurrian dative suffix, "goes to")

Ja ("Deity", probably intermediate between Etruscan Ais and Hurrian Ya
)

O-Su-Ka (Hurrian Sauska)

-re (Hurrian commitative suffix, "along with")

Sa-Sa-Ra (variety of the name Ishara)

-me (-ne, Hurrian article suffix, simply denotes "The")

This segment translates as, The throne goes to the deities Sauska and Ishara...
A true gem of crack-pot science. Notice the symptoms:
- the Truth which of course you know, we, the other mortals (including also the best experts in the field), have still to learn to be able to see It
- the typical "deciphering" method, actually being some sort of speculative puzzle hard to understand by anyone else but its creator (O-Su-Ka = Sauska?, Sa-Sa-Ra = Ishara?, me = ne? not to mention that 301 represents actually a Liniar A symbol which conveniently is not part of your "translation", probably it would have ruined that "Hurrianoid" sentence)
 


Edited by Chilbudios - 27-Oct-2008 at 21:30
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2396
Post Options Post Options   Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2008 at 12:22
Originally posted by Flipper

Look at the placenames in Crete. They point clearly to Luwian origin.


That would be fine, except that those names are almost certainly not the original Minoan names for those places. Even if the root is Minoan - for which there is no evidence - the suffixes certainly aren't.

Edited by edgewaters - 30-Oct-2008 at 12:25
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2008 at 13:42
Originally posted by edgewaters

That would be fine, except that those names are almost certainly not the original Minoan names for those places. Even if the root is Minoan - for which there is no evidence - the suffixes certainly aren't.
Suffixes in many cases are actually morphological desinences and usually languages get loanwords but use their own morphological rules (a bit harder to see in English, but it can be easily noticed in loanwords in languages with a rich morphology). Greek has a lot of words which scholars identified as non-Greek in origin, but for many they do not look non-Greek.
 
Names like Knossos, Parnassos could be very well an Anatolian word with typical Greek morphology (in this case a sygmatic nominative). Based on the information Flipper provided, a Luwian place name could look like *Parnassa.
 


Edited by Chilbudios - 30-Oct-2008 at 13:53
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2008 at 18:11
Originally posted by edgewaters

Originally posted by Flipper

Look at the placenames in Crete. They point clearly to Luwian origin.


That would be fine, except that those names are almost certainly not the original Minoan names for those places. Even if the root is Minoan - for which there is no evidence - the suffixes certainly aren't.


But what would they be? If the Minoan Kindom declined around 1600BC because of the tsunami of the Thera erruption, who were the ones to change the placemanes within just 150 years? The Greek speaking populations had already founded cities in the mainland, so they would be aware of a later Luwian invasion between 1600-1450. Moreover, the Greeks seemed not to bother that much about changing the placenames, since they were already in use.

The -os endings might be tricky and seem Greek but in many cases non-Greek placenames/names look Greek in the Balkans and Anatolia. The difference between a Greek name and a non-Greek name ending in similar suffixes is that the Greek names have always an explainable etymology. Like the example of Parnassos, it might sound Greek directly to a foreigner but it doesn't mean something in Greek.

Thracian names can in many cases sound 100% Greek, but are easily identified as non-Greek because of the lacking Greek etymology. Phrygian names can fall into the same category in most cases. Sometimes, the names can be almost the same, with the difference that the Phrygian version might be like "distorted" Greek with switching of consonants.




SÃ¥ nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2008 at 18:22
Just a quick example for you edgewaters, to see what i ment with the post above.

Which of the following names are Greek, which Phrygian and which are Thracian?

- Skilas (Σκύλας)
- Eptakenthos (Επτάκενθος)
- Aewas (ΑίFας)
- Zinos (Ζήνος)
- Byzas (Βύζας)
- Manes (Μάνης)
- Mantas (Μαντάς)

Believe me, unless you happen to hit on them sometime, it is not easy at all to tell.



SÃ¥ nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Oct-2008 at 18:53
Just a quick example for you edgewaters, to see what i ment with the post above.

Which of the following names are Greek, which Phrygian and which are Thracian?

- Skilas (Σκύλας)
- Eptakenthos (Επτάκενθος)
- Aewas (ΑίFας)
- Zinos (Ζήνος)
- Byzas (Βύζας)
- Manes (Μάνης)
- Mantas (Μαντάς)

Believe me, unless you happen to hit on them sometime, it is not easy at all to tell.



SÃ¥ nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 8>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.