Critic of the Decipherment of Linear A - Literature review Example

Critic of the Decipherment of Linear A Critic of the Decipherment of Linear A Linear A refers to one of the two undeciphered writing systems utilized in Ancient Greece. The other is the Cretan Hieroglyphic (Marle, 2003). Linear A was the main scrip utilized in religious and palace writings of the Minoan Civilization and was discovered by Sir Arthur Evans, one of the most celebrated archaeologists ever (Rendsburg, 1982). Linear A is the origin of the Linear B script that later can to be utilized by the Mycenaean civilization (Marle, 2003). This paper will review two articles that discuss the decipherment of Linear A and contrast, as well as critic their ideas. The two articles are On Jan Best’s “Decipherment” of Minoan Linear A by Gary A. Rendsburg and Reading Linear A: Script, Morphology and Glossary of the Minoan Language by Hubert La Marle. Summary of On Jan Best’s “Decipherment” of Minoan Linear The central thrust of Rendsburg’s article is that the Minoan Linear A inscriptions are Semitic, meaning that they are closely linked to Ugaritic (Rendsburg, 1982). Rendsburg argues that any individual with significant knowledge on Minoica, classics, Semitics Mediterranean archaeology will straight away come to the conclusion that such a statement is nothing new or revelational, instead only in agreements with the Cyrus H. Gordon’s work in the last quarter of the 20th century (Rendsburg, 1982). Nevertheless, when it was disclosed that the material presented is basically the same as the one presented by Gordon, and yet his study were uncited, and that the additional material was unscholarly presented, one cannot remain silent. Rendsburg’s article is split into four sections, which include: (1) Yassaram; (2) Cretan Writing: Origins; (3) Nochmals Yassaram; and finally (4) Von Linear A zu Linear B (Rendsburg, 1982). Rendsburg begins this article by delving into the origins of Cretan writing arguing that some Linear A signs were derived from Egyptian hieroglyphs, which several come from Sumero-Akkadian cuneiform signs and others have their equivalent ancestral symbols (Rendsburg, 1982). Rendsburg generally discusses the phonetic and orthographic of Linear A and B. He proposes that the two Linears are, in essence, abbreviations for Semitic words for clothing, particularly Akkadian zuluhhu and huratu. Rendsburg discusses how the over a hundred Linear A signs (Rendsburg, 1982). He says that they are believed to represent ideographic, syllabic, as well as semantic values, in a way comparable to Linear B (Rendsburg, 1982). Whereas many of those assumed to be syllabic signs are similar to ones in Linear B, roughly 80% of Linear As logograms are distinctive; the dissimilarity in sound values between Linear A and B signs vary from 9% to 13%. However, even if the article seems educative, there are a number of critics that can be seen from it (Rendsburg, 1982). Critics of On Jan Best’s “Decipherment” of Minoan Linear There are many problems with Rendsburg’s suggestions. Rendsburg presents only six cases of Linear A signs that he argues derive from cuneiform signs: pa, na, te, ni, du and pe. First, it must be affirmed that only Linear A pa, di, te and pe are comparable to their presumed cuneiform forebars. However, aside from this rather discriminative criterion is the extra challenge that the cuneiform ni and di signs are attested mainly from Amarna, Ugarit, Bogazkoy and Alalakh (Rendsburg, 1982). Since its heyday, in the Western centers, it was hard to envision how such signs would have persuaded Linear A, which is anticipated to have been in use from the start of 1660. Thus, we are left behind with just pa < cuneiform pa and pe and cuneiform pes as the only plausible derivations. But because the last is overly rare in Sumero-Akkadian syllabus, in essence, we are left with only the former as the likely correspondence. Therefore, from such small proof, we cannot, by any chance, develop any kind of theory (Rendsburg, 1982). For the second part of his arguments, Rendsburg posits Egyptian hieroglyphics. This has a lot to commend itself, particularly in view of the proof offered by Sir Arthur Evans as to Egyptian influence on premature Crete (Rendsburg, 1982). However, here again, Rendsburg offers limited proof, presenting only two cases of Cretan signs that allegedly adapt from Egyptian hieroglyphic samples. The first of these confuse two signs, L75 and L82, which has respectively been proposed as syllable wa and ideographic “wine,” rooted in its resemblance with the Egyptian hieroglyph M43 (Rendsburg, 1982). Both of these signs are essentially the same, but adapt from the Egyptian hieroglyph M43 to A Linear ideographic “wine” to A Linear syllabic that is enough to develop a theory. Summary of Reading Linear A: Script, Morphology and Glossary of the Minoan Language This article discusses the origin the Linear A script and its decipherment (Marle, 2003). According to the author, the British antiquarian Arthur Evans initially looked at the earliest case of a European script in the hands of a young boy in the dim light of Crete’s Pyschro cave, back in 1896. It would be four years later before Evans gained global acknowledgement for brining the Minoan civilization to light at Knossos (Marle, 2003). Starting his research with great inscriptions of Linear A curved on offering tables, the author found in the many peak sanctuaries on the mountains of Crete a clear connection between Linear A and Sanskrit, the ancient Indian language. The author also discusses the link between Armenian and Hittite with regards to the decipherment of Linear A (Marle, 2003). This link permits us to put the Minoan language among the alleged Indo-European languages, a large family, which comprises of Modern Greek and Latin. The Greek and Minoan languages are regarded to be dissimilar branches of Indo-European (Marle, 2003). The Minoans maybe moved from Anatolia to the island of Crete nearly 10,000 years ago. There were comparable population migrations to Greece (Marle, 2003). The relative isolation of the population that settled in Crete led to the growth of its own language, Minoan, that is regarded unique to Mycenaean. In the Minoan language (Linear A), there are no Greek words at all, as is the case of Mycenaean Linear B; it comprises of words only found in Greek, Latin and Sanskrit, that is those sharing the similar Indo-European origin (Marle, 2003). Criticism of Reading Linear A: Script, Morphology and Glossary of the Minoan Language From the view this other gave, it is easy to evaluate a specific analysis of Linear A as there is extensive point of reference for understanding its inscriptions. The author presented the simplest approach to decipherment claiming that it might be assumed that the values of Linear A match more or less the given values to the deciphered Linear B utilized for Mycenaean Greek. This argument cannot be disputed as many researchers also believe this to be true, but there are also many other points made by the author, which can be disputed. There was a point made by the author such as there are remarkable resemblance between Hitto-Luwian morphology and Minoan, but scientists have proved that there are none. None of the present theories of the origin of the Hitto-Luwian populace and their passage to Anatolia are linked to Crete (Marle, 2003). In the article, there was a lack of direct link between Minoan Crete and Hitto-Luwians. This is because researchers claim that Minoan Crete was never listed in Hitto-Luwian inscriptions. Small states located along the western coast of ancient Asia Minor were natural barriers between Hitto-Luwians and Minoan Crete (Marle, 2003). Clear anthropological distinctions between the Minoans and Hitto-Luwians might be regarded as another circuitous testimony against this theory. References Marle, H. L. (2003). Reading Linear A: script, morphology and glossary of the Minoan language. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/303303/Minoan_mantras._The_quiet_decipherment_of_Linear_A Rendsburg, G. A. (1982). On Jan Best’s “decipherment” of Minoan Linear A. Retrieved from https://www.jtsa.edu/Documents/pagedocs/JANES/1982%2014/Rendsburg14.pdf Read More