Tuesday, October 15, 2019


 Source: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/article235714732.html
This is one sample of a large collection of inscribed stones that were discovered in the mountains in the western end of the island of Puerto Rico;  these rocks are known as Las Piedras del Padre Nazario, or Father Nazario’s Stones, named after José María Nazario, a priest and amateur archaeologist from Guayanilla on Puerto Rico’s southern coast, who found some 800 of these objects in the 1880s;  they were examined sceptically and superficially in the early 1900s by a Harvard-trained scientist (zoologist interested in anthropology), Dr Jesse Walter Fewkes, and they have ever since been considered to be forgeries or fakes; but local archeologist Reniel Rodríguez Ramos has been studying them since 2001,  and he hopes to use them as evidence of the ancient (precolumban) history of the country.

Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/article235714732.html#storylink=cpywho found them in the 1880s;

Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/article235714732.html#storylink=cpy
   Another photograph of this particular stone:

This has the advantage of showing more of the writing on the  right hand side of the stone (actually the top, when the inscribed signs are oriented correctly).
   Looking first at the lower section, and reading between the lines, so to speak, we see a character that is like a figure 9; it could be a B of the Phoenician alphabet, but my experience of West Semitic (Phoenician/Canaanian) scripts urges me to view this and all the other signs vertically rather than horizontally, thus:

This makes more sense to me, and I am astonished: we have here a selection of letters ("syllabograms") from the West Semitic syllabary of the Bronze Age. After a period of contemplation of this array of characters, I am thinking that the inscriber's intention was not to write words or names, but simply three sets of related syllabograms, nine in total. The West Semitic syllabic script is the forerunner of the West Semitic consonantary (the Phoenician consonantal alphabet, from which all other alphabets are derived, notably the Grecian and the Roman). As I have argued in my essay on the origin of the alphabet (2014), most of the letters in the Phoenician alphabet were already in the syllabary, and an example of T (a cross) stands before us, but in an oblique stance; if it had equal strokes like the multiplication sign (X) it would be the syllabogram KU (according to the decipherment of George Mendenhall, published in 1985, and slightly modified by myself in 1992). The syllabary had three signs for each consonant, representing TA, TI, TU, or KA KI KU, and in many cases the sign with the -a vowel was borrowed for the protoalphabet; D was a door (DA from daltu door), but the cross was apparently TU, and the K was KI. Both writing systems (syllabary and consonantary) were constructed by employing the acrophonic principle, whereby the first sound (syllable or consonant) of the word that described the object in each sign: hence DA and D from daltu door.
   We may begin our quest with the sign at the top in the centre: I see it as an eye, for which the Semitic word is `aynu, and so it is an -a syllable, with a guttural consonant, conventionally transcribed as an inverted or reversed comma, an apostrophe (like a superscript c, or here `); this symbol had become circular by the time  it entered the Hellenic alphabet as the vowel o (Omikron); the Greeks had no use for it as a guttural consonant, and likewise the Romans. Here it has an appendage, which may identify it as the sacred eye of the god Horus (Egyptian hieroglyph D10 in the classification system of Alan Gardiner, Egyptian Grammar, p. 451); this would distinguish it from the mouth sign (PU, alphabetic P,  appearing as () when in vertical stance); there might also be some eyelashes at the top, and even a pupil.

   Next, to the left of  `A  is a "semi-oval", like an inverted letter U, and by coincidence it represents the syllable `U (again according to the decipherment of Mendenhall and Colless).
   Moving now to the right of the eye-sign (between the double lines) we have another incomplete oval, which Mendenhall recognized as `I, and my idea is that it goes with `ipipu eyelid.
  So, amazingly, we have the three signs that refer to a particular consonant with the three standard vowels (u, a, i, as in Arabic). Is there a similar pattern in the remaining characters?
   Below the eye-sign is an object that looks like a throne or a step; Mendenhall and I connected it with hudmu footstool, and identified it as the syllabogram HU.
   Further to the right, between the lines and below the eyelid, is a square building with an entrance (viewed from above), a temple (haykalu) and thus HA.
   Finally, outside the tramlines, is a murky version of HI, from hillulu jubilation (as in Halleluyah! Celebrate Yahweh!); it is a figure of a person jubilating with arms raised, and the alphabetic version of H was used by the Greeks and Romans for the vowel E (note the head and arms, with the body discarded over the centuries of evolution).
   Returning now to the large leaning cross: Mendenhall and I felt that the cross was TU. Our choice for TI is found in the serpentine sign below the temple, though it is not a snake but a harp (tibbuttu).
   But where is the sign for TA? The sequence for `ayin and H was, from left to right: -U, -A, -I, and, by the way, these are the case endings for nouns (nominative u, accusative a, genitive i). On our tables, Mendenhall and I have preferred the AIU order, in accordance with the AEIOU pattern in the English alphabet; but strange to say, I had recently thought of changing from AIU to UAI, and suddenly this document popped up and demanded my attention.
   Accordingly, we search between the cross and the harp for a character constructed of two vertical parallel lines (which need not be of the same length), joined at the top by a crossbeam, and constituting a grapevine stand; I have suggested that it was associated with tarashu, a word for "new wine".  Such a figure could perhaps be construed from the scored marks above the cross and below the `U.
An example of the vine-stand is available on another of the Puerto Rico stones, from the Smithsonian museum:

Mu Ta  water and new wine? (a mixed drink?)

For the record. here is another part of the same stone:

There is mention of a stone slab covered with such characters, and that is something I would really like to see; it might have a complete table of the syllabary.

Statuettes are also part of the collection: this Smithsonian stone may be a figurine; and the stone we have already examined, with all the `ayin, Ha, and Ta syllable-signs, is  in the shape of a human bust (head and chest sculpture), as can be seen in this picture.

Dr. Iris Groman-Yaroslavsky, left, with Prof. Reniel Rodríguez Ramos
examining some of the Puerto Rican figurines at Haifa University

In the middle line of the inscription on this figurine is a typical letter Sh of the protoalphabet, as seen on inscriptions from the Sinai turquoise mines: it is based on an Egyptian  symbol for the sun, with a serpent on each side; in the known inscriptions the sun-disk could be shown or omitted, and it is tempting to see this as a case where the sun is retained; a similar sign appears on the top line, on the left (and possibly another one on the left), but this could represent human breasts, and therefore stand for the sound Th (as in thing); the usual form of this character is more angular, resembling the English letter W. In the bottom line we can perhaps see an alphabetic L (a herdsman's crook), so this would not be a syllabic text. However, the fine details on the baseline are not clear, and I can imagine the letter next to it is a Q (--o-) a cord wound on a stick, or W (--o) a nail; further left a Sadey (emphatic s or ts) a tied bag. But my brain is constructing things it already knows from tricks of light in a photograph.
   Here is another view of this object:
    My L is now lacking; but there is possibly a LA-syllabogram at the bottom. The Sh-sun with its two serpents is still there in the centre, but, as I know from experience, it could be syllabic SHA as well as consonantal Sh. However, it is not known in the Phoenician consonantal alphabet of the Iron Age (after 1200 BCE). Therefore, this West Semitic writing would have been introduced into this island in the Bronze Age.
   Note that the West Semitic syllabary and consonantary (the protoalphabet) functioned in tandem in the Bronze Age (before 1200 BCE).

We must now go back to the University of Haifa.
 Dr. Iris Groman-Yaroslavsky examined the objects in depth at her laboratory. Her findings confirmed that the objects were carved in the sixteenth century, and are not a modern forgery, and she also discovered evidence showing that some of the objects were coated in gold and in red paint. “This is definitely one of the strangest and most fascinating stories I’ve been involved in,” Dr. Groman-Yaroslavsky confessed. “To date, we have not found any similar carved stone art objects from this region of America, and this is why many researchers assumed that they must be fake. However, the microscopic tests we performed show beyond any doubt that the stones were carved around 600 years ago.”
Where do we go from here?! Well, we read the rest of that article (University of Haifa), where we are told that the figurines are "ancient".

Saturday, June 29, 2019


Garbini, Giovanni; Maria Michela Luiselli & Guido Devoto (2004): "Sigillo di età amarniana da Biblo con iscrizione." Rendiconti dell'Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei 9/15, 377-390.

The remarkable little object we see at the top is a cylinder stamp or seal (the photograph shows an imprint of its features), apparently emanating from somewhere in Phoenicia, possibly Byblos (Gubla), and published by Giovanni Garbini (now deceased); he recognized two striking features: it imitates the family portrait of Pharaoh Akhenaton and Queen Nefertiti, with their three daughters (Egyptian Museum, Berlin, 14145), and it has inscriptions in the West Semitic syllabic script (whereas the Egyptian counterpart has hieroglyphic writing). Since Akhenaton reigned in the middle of the fourteenth century before the current era (BCE), the Semitic artefact could not be earlier than that. One typical detail in each image is the sun disc (Aton) with its rays having hands to distribute its benefits, which are celebrated in the Hymn to the Aton.
   Notice that the Phoenician image is reversed: the personage corresponding to Nefertiti (who is holding two children) is on the left side of the photograph, and the father (with one daughter) is on the right. It is not clear that the Semitic couple are meant to be Akhenaton and Nefertiti; the headdresses are not the same as those on the Egyptian royals. On the plaque the names of the Egyptian family members are recorded in hieroglyphs in columns and cartouches: the daughters are Meritaten, Meketaten, and Ankhesenpaaten; Tutankhaten (later King Tutankhamen, not a child of Nefertiti) is not in the picture. One suggestion is that the three columns of Semitic text provide the daughters' names (Michael Mäder), and this would assist us in deciphering this script.
   However, this is not the result we get when we apply the system of decipherment proposed by George Mendenhall in 1985, and adopted and adapted by myself as the West Semitic logo-syllabary.
   This exercise will be undertaken with the aid of a model prepared by Mäder.

Michael Mäder (University of Bern, personal communication) sets forth a prima facie case of circumstantial evidence, whoch is very attractive. This is an edited version of his statements (the original is reproduced at the end of this essay).
 On the Egyptian Familenstele Berlin, 14145 (Krauss 1991) there are three inscriptions which include the names Meketaton, Meritaton and Ankhesen-pa-Amun.
 On the Semitic seal, likewise, there are three short texts in corresponding positions, adjacent to the three daughters.
The names  would be read in Egyptian: Meritaton on the legs of father, Meketaton on legs of mother, Ankhesen-pa-Amun on shoulder of mother. 
 They have the same relative extension, i.e. Meketaton and Meritaton short, Ankhesen-pa-Amun longer.
The two shorter ones begin with the same syllable (me) and end with the same (ATON [Egyptogram]).
 In the longest of the names, Ankhesen-pa-Amun, has the expected syllable pa in its 4th position.
 The 4th sign in the Byblos version has the form of a cross or "bird with outspread wings". This suits the fact that pa in Egyptian syllabic writing has the form of a cross (originating from a bird with outspread wings).
The sign in the shape of a "2" would be me (in Meketaton and Meritaton)
The fact that one of the "2"-shaped signs is mirrored fits the Egyptian names which also are mirrored, see Krauss 1991:11.  (It was a habit of Egyptian scribes to place the signs in the same direction as the faces of the persons they describe are heading.)
This is certainly an impressive set of arguments.
In response, we might first ask: If the names of the personages on the seal were given, would it not be the King (Akhenaton) and the Queen (Nefertiti) who were named, rather than the children? The royal couple were the intermediaries between the Sun-deity and humans. If this was a personal seal, the name of its owner might be present.
Second, if the initial signs of the two M...Aton sisters are supposedly mirrored, or rather the signs are facing the depiction of the person who is named, according to the Egyptian convention, I would have to say that these "2" letters are not the same; and the one on the left is actually the second letter in the sequence.
And the signs at the bottom of the cartouches are similar but not the same; they are supposed to represent the Aton, the disc of the sun. The sun-sign in this West Semitic syllabary is found in the long text, in second position: a circle with a dot in it (equivalent to Egyptian hieroglyph N5).
 The proposed form Ankhesen-pa-Amun for the third sister comes as a surprise, but it can be validated: as noted above, Tutankhaten became Tutankhamen, when worship of the Aton was abandoned, and the same principle applies to Ankhesen-pa-aten; but I can not see her name on this cylinder seal. Incidentally, the Egyptian Ankh sign, representing "life", has a place in the West Semitic syllabary, as H.I (h.iwatu, life). It does not appear in these inscriptions, though it could perhaps have been used as logogram in her name.

Hence, I do not see this document as naming the children, but think it might relate to the boat in the upper half: solar barque, ship of the dead? The idea that a justified dead person could travel with the Sun in his ship?.

Columns Ra - Rc (vertical downwards)
[Ra]  HU (hudmu footstool) SHI (shimshu sun) LA (laylu night) KU (X) TA (tarashu wine) SU (sukkatu booth)
[Rb] `A (`aynu eye) TI (tibbuttu harp) GA? (gamlu boomerang) DI (bolt)  WU (Egyp. hieroglyph)                
[Rc] NA (nah.ashu snake, or RU eagle-vulture) BA (baytu house) ZA (eyebrows or tail) TA (or HA?)
[Rd] (L-R?) NI (nigh.atu tusk)  SA SA (samku support) BU (bunduru reed)

hu shi la ku saved (passive-causative, root sh-l-k 2, Job 29.17)
ta su `a ti salvation (root Y/W Sh/S `)
gadi  good-fortune (or Gad, prosperity-deity)
wu and?
na ba za ta  document (cp. shi sa ni ba za ti on Gubla Spatula E; Akkadian nibzu)
ni sa sa bu  stand (Hbr ns.s.b, nip`al of NS.B) 
The seated god resurrects the suppliant?
Perhaps this is a seal or stamp  for making copies of an "indulgence" (Ablass) certificate.
It has apparent connections with my reading of the cylinders from Tuba
NUSHI`U "saved"
HLL "Celebrate"
NIKAWANA "he is established"
This reminds me of the Egyptian Book of the Dead, with the deceased passing through the hall of judgement and emerging "justified of voice" (his claim to be innocent has been accepted by the divine judges).

From Michael Mäder (University of Bern):
"- As on the Byblos seal, also on the Familenstele Berlin, 14145, there are three inscriptions which depict the names Meketaton, Meritaton and Ankhesen-pa-Amun.

- They are positioned at the exact same places respectively.

- The names without doubt read in Egyptian: Meritaton on the legs of father, Meketaton on legs of mother, Ankhesen-pa-Amun on shoulder of mother. (This is important, because when the Reader reads your blog he thinks this would be just a theory...)

- They have the same relative extension, i.e. Meketaton and Meritaton short, Ankhesen-pa-Amun longer.

- The two shorter ones begin with the same syllable (me) and end with the same (ATON [Egyptogram])

- The longer one is the only one which ends on a different syllable, a fact which would fit to the (later) different ending of Ankhesen-pa-Amun (AMUN? not Aton? BEC)

- In the longest of the names, Ankhesen-pa-Amun, has the expected syllable pa in its 4th position.
-  The 4th sign in the Byblos version has the form of a cross or "bird with outspread wings". This suits the fact that pa in Egyptian syllabic writing has the form of a cross (originating from a bird with outspread wings)

- Based on these considerations Michael Mäder (University of Bern, personal information) suggests the reading of the two respective Byblos signs as me and pa: me is the sign in the shape of a "2", and pa is the sign in the shape of a cross.
- The fact that one of the "2"-shaped signs is mirrored fits to the Egyptian names which also are mirrored, see Krauss 1991:11.  (It was a habit of Egyptian scribes to place the signs in the same direction as the faces of the persons they describe are heading.)"

Krauss 1991 =
Krauss, Rolf (1991): Die amarnazeitliche Familienstele Berlin 14145 unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Massordnung und Komposition. Jahrbuch der Berliner Museen 33, 7-36.

Thursday, May 30, 2019


17 May 2019
My latest suggestion
 Reading syllabically from right to left (sinistrograde):
 ... N  [  ] [YA] NU H.U LU QU (U?) M ...
"... bad/sour (h.ulqu) wine (yanu) and (u?) water (M...)"
This interpretation follows the line laid down by Gershon Galil and Douglas Petrovich: in their view the pot was  a vessel containing inferior wine, possibly for workers on building sites in Jerusalem.
   Perhaps the full text contained a word for "jar" or even "pithos"; Ugaritic dn (also Arabic and Aramaic) was a jar for wine (and vinegar, Yoma 28b, Jastrow 315a). But Raz Kletter (268) says "Galil's reading does not fit the Jerusalem pithos, since it is not a wine vessel", and Kletter maintains that position because it has "a very large, open mouth",  and this would allow the wine to have contact with oxygen and be ruined. This might support my first idea that it was for storing water, rather than wine; but if this was intended to be a container for spoiled wine, which was placed on open access for drinkers to put a ladle or cup into it, then there can be no objection.
   Kletter dismisses my water-jar solution because I cannot adduce such an inscribed vessel from the Iron Age, although I can find apparent examples in the Late Bronze Age (from Gezer, see above).
   Similarly, he points out that the term h.lq is not found with reference to wine in any other inscription in Palestine/Israel, nor in the Bible. But this could be an isolated and welcome instance of that usage, already attested at Ugarit; and maybe the language of Yebus (Yerushalayim) was closer to Ugaritic than to Israelian Hebrew. At the same time he ridicules the thought that a container of wine could be labeled as "inferior" or "bad". But that would only apply if the commodity was for sale, not if it was being offered gratis. This jar was perhaps made and marked as a receptacle for such liquid, and so it would probably not have royal references on it.
   Precisely what was meant by yn hlq remains unclear. If the primary sense of hlq is 'perish', parallel with mt 'dead', and the opposite of t.b (Cyrus Gordon, Ugaritic Textbook, Glossary, 969, p. 403) then such wine (a 'perishable' food) would be 'perished', 'gone bad', or 'become rotten', no longer 'good' (sweet) and thus 'sour' (vin aigre, vinegar). Biblical Hebrew h.lq does not offer obvious assistance, expressing ideas of smoothness or apportioning; but Petrovich leans towards associating the term yyn h.lq with deception (as in smooth-tongued), and proposing the improbable 'pseudo-wine' as the solution. He does mention Ah.ituv's note on h.ms. (vinegar) in Arad Ostracon 2 (Echoes from the Past, 98): Roman legionaries drank posca, "a mixture of vinegar and water, sometimes sweetened with honey". This reminds me of my own daily beverage of water with apple cider vinegar and honey. Of course, wine was customarily drunk with water. I am pondering whether these three ingredients can be found here: water (which I had first suggested as the contents of this vessel) with vinegar, and perhaps also honey.
   The water could easily be found in the final sequence  M[..], as Hebrew mayim, or simply M as a logogram, or an abbreviation. It is more difficult to make this a 'honey pot', finding a place for West Semitic dbs (debash) or nbt.
   But if we are to read the combination "vinegar and water", where is the conjunctive W (or P)?
(The conjunction wa often seems to be lacking: for example, in the Wadi el-Hol list of  sacrificial foods for the `Anat celebration.) It has occurred to me, that the missing WA is actually U (which would be expected here before labial M, in Hebrew) and this could not be represented in consonantal writing; if 'u was written, it would mean 'or'.
   I still need to justify the syllabic reading [YA]NU H.ULUQU, as opposed (but not violently so!) to [YY]N H.LQ.
   For his YYN, Gershon Galil posits two cases of Yod in the style of a character that appears three times on the Qeiyafa ostracon (though Yod also has two other stances in that neo-syllabic text): the arm has the hand (two strokes) pointing downwards, and that would make a total of four vertical lines, one of which is visible, emerging from the gap. However, these reconstructed figures are huge in comparison with the Qeiyafa model; that is not impossible, and its plausibility could be tested if the missing piece of the pot turns up; but I am proposing the alternative prototype of Yod with the hand at the top (as apparently on the Izbet Sartah ostracon, and on the Lakish bowl sherd); the two strokes of the hand (looking like pincers) are partly discernible above the empty space, with the end of the arm protruding at the bottom. However, this leaves a space before the Yod, increasing our frustration that the missing pieces are not available for inspection. There could have been another Yod there, as Gershon Galil suggested, indicating the southern Hebrew form of the word yayin.
   Regarding the syllabic reading, most of the letters are not the standard forms of the international alphabet, and by my calculation there is a preponderance of -u syllabograms in [YA]NU H.ULUQU.
Cyrus Gordon (Glossary 402b) has an Akkadian form hulqu (equated with la t.âbu, 'not good'), and  H.ULUQU is a correct syllabic transcription of that.
   One little defect remains to defeat us: there is a space before the incomplete YA, and it could be another YA, producing [YAYA]NU, yaynu, 'wine' (Judean style). To achieve [YAYI]NI, yayin, the text would have to be read in the opposite direction, but this would annihilate H.ULUQU.
   If the first letter on the right is N, rather than M, and if it is syllabic and not simply the standard Phoenician Nun, then it possibly represents NI, having the reverse form of the other N, which I take to be NU. Could it have been preceded by the syllabic sign HI? Possibilities are: HINI hin measure? hén? hinnè? "Here is" or "This is"?
   The letter He appears twice on the incomplete Beth-Shemesh vertical inscription, engraved on two shards from a vessel. The second is in a sequence HN, accepted by P. Kyle McCarter as the measure hin. The first H has the form of Greco-Roman E. The second H seems to be the same, though the photographs show a projection from the bottom of the spine; this would make it the same as the standard Phoenician form, though reversed (its three strokes could point in the direction of the writing, to the right or to the left, along a horizontal line).
   Kyle McCarter's drawing shows the projecting line as a surface defect in the clay (although it seems to be attached to the letter in photographs)  (McCarter, 188, Figure 5, and 185, n.2). He favours a meaning hin (measure) for the word, and this syllabic sign would provide the HI syllable. When there are a few letters only, it is difficult to establish whether the text is syllabic or consonantal, and that is likewise the problem with the Ophel pot.
    From all the sifting of ancient debris of Jerusalem, the missing pieces of the puzzle might turn up, but we shall probably  never know what the scribe intended. Meanwhile I am holding onto my guess that this was an open-mouthed jar for containing water mixed with vinegar,  for the refreshment of troops of soldiers, and/or gangs of workers. If it is syllabic it is Iron I, like the Qeiyafa ostracon; if it is simply consonantal, but not conforming to the the standard international (Phoenician) alphabet, then it is to be classed with the Eshbaal jar from Khirbet Qeiyafa (Shaarayim), to be dated in late Iron I rather than Iron II, in the time of King Saul, not King David, nor King Solomon, and specifically in the Yebus period of Yerushalayim, before David annexed it to his united kingdom.
   For clarification, let me state my present position on Khirbet Qeiyafa and its two inscriptions: the text of the ostracon is neo-syllabic, and its subject is the victory of David (not King David) over the `Anaq named Guliyut;  the Eshbaal jar inscription is consonantal, but its letters are not in conformity with the international alphabet used in the Levant, of which the characters tend to be the -i syllabograms in the neo-syllabary. The archaeological evidence from Khirbet Qeiyafa (Shaarayim) shows that its existence as a fortress in the Iron I period was of short duration; the presence of Eshbaal, a son of King Saul, on this site indicates that this town was built by King Saul, not King David, as a bastion against the Philistines of Gath and Ekron; but it was apparently destroyed by them, together with the capital city Gibeah (Tell el-Ful), at the time of the battle of Mount Gilboa (1 Samuel 31:1-7); less probably, it might have been a casualty in the war between the house of Saul and the house of David (2 Samuel 3:1). David chose not to rebuild Shaarayim, but moved further down the road  to make Yerushalayim his stronghold.

   My continuing struggle with the Qeiyafa inscriptions is available for inspection:

Benjamin Sass, The Genesis of the Alphabet (1988)
Brian E. Colless, The Proto-alphabetic inscriptions of Canaan,  Abr-Nahrain (Ancient Near Eastern Studies) 29 (1991) 18-66.
Gershon Galil, ‘yyn ḫlq’ The Oldest Hebrew Inscription from Jerusalem, Strata 31 (2013) 11-26.
Douglas Petrovich, The Ophel Pithos Inscription: Its Dating, Language, Translation, and Script, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 147, 2  (2015) 130-145.
Raz Kletter, Notes on the Jerusalem Iron IIA pithos inscription, Palestine Exploration Quarterly 150, 4 (2018) 265-270.
P. Kyle McCarter et al, An Archaic Ba`l Inscription from Tel Beth-Shemesh .......


Brian Colless
School of Humanities, Massey University, NZ

(Click on this table of the evolution of the alphabet to view it in enlargement)

Georgeos Diaz-Montexano said...
Mr. Brian Edric Colless:

I hope that this could be your interest: (In Spanish: La enigmática inscripción del Templo De Salomón. ¿El más antiguo testimonio de paleohebreo?)

Kind regards,

Wednesday, June 07, 2017


P: Pictophonograms (“hieroglyphs”) pictorial glyphs.[1]
PD: Phaistos Disc script (pictophonic, and linear).[2]
A: Linear A syllabary.[3]
B: Linear B syllabary.[4]
AB: Linear A signs identified with their B counterparts.[5]
CA: Cyprian Archaic syllabary (derived from Linear A).[6]
CC: Cyprian Cuneiform (Cypro-Minoan).[7]
C: Linear C, the Cyprian syllabary.[8]

   A (P42, AB8, CA2, CC101, 102, C A) is an ax (axinê), with triangular or curved blades, but these were squared in the stylization process.

   A/HA (B25) arrow?

   AI (A306, B43) possibly a goat (aiks) or an eagle (aietos); cp. QI and ME.

   AU (P17 13a, AB85) a pig.

   E (P28, AB38, CA17, CC38, C E; also PD2) can be related to etheira, “hair” or “horse hair crest on helmets” (Homer).

   I (P31, A28a, AB28, CA21/104, CC104. C I) appears to be an olive branch, hence ‘iketêria (elaia), a suppliant’s olive branch, wound around with wool, and the end of the thread is shown on some of the A28a forms; this causes confusion with the thumb of NO, and these are both mistakenly catalogued under A28; see NO below.

   O (P5, AB61, CC64 84 66, C O) is an eye, still detectable in some Linear A glyphs (HT Wa 1279 shows the pupil and the eyelashes); it has been confused with the BEER sign (AB123) on TL Za 1a

   U (P95, AB10, CC19 20 79, C U) apparently began as ‘ustrix, a porcupine or hedgehog, but its features were lost, and, like KU (dog), it was wrongly seen as a bird.

   BA/PHA (AB56) a ladder with 3 or 4 rungs (not klimaks, but bathron, a set of steps or ladder).

   BU (see PHU)

   DA (P27, P29, AB1, CA18, CC4, C TA) is a leafy twig (thallos) but reduced to a stick form (|-).

   DE (P37, P94c, AB45; CC97, C RO) is a dwelling on legs; its equivalent character on the Phaistos Disc (PD24) is more detailed, with a dome-top and a protruding plate; it resembles some of the later tombs in Lykia; perhaps thêkê, “grave” (or demein, “build”). Because Linear A RO (the + sign) was used for Cyprian LO, a new RO had to be found for the Cyprian syllabary, and apparently DE was adopted for RO.

   DI (P39, AB7) seems to be a net, perhaps on a pole in the present case, and Greek diktuon, “net” comes to mind; P39 represents network and would be the original sign.

   DO (P50, A304, B14) looks like a spear, and doru has that meaning.

   DU (P59, P60, AB51, CC32 46 47 106, C SU) can be seen as a man with a crook, though some of its developed shapes are enigmatic; its original pictogram would be the crook alone (P59, and P60, which has an angle rather than a curve at the top). The staff could be a symbol of power (Greek dunamis, dunasteia); the man (dunastês, potentate) must have been added for clarity, but this detail was obscured in the Linear B version; it reappears in Cyprian SU.

   DWE (B71, P4?)

   DWO (AB118) is a pair of scales, symbolizing “weight”.

   KA (P47, AB77, CA9, CC25, C KA) appears regularly as a cross (+) within a circle, like Tet in the Phoenician alphabet, and Theta; its source would be P47, a cane basket with a handle, sometimes with elaborate cross-hatching, but more often with no weaving indicated; the AB form has omitted the handle and simplified the wickerwork; the corresponding Egyptian hieroglyph (V31) of a wickerwork basket with a handle is viewed from the side; it represents k, but the reason is unknown; Kaptarian KA can readily be connected with Greek kaneon, “cane basket”. The Alashian KA (CA9) started as the encircled cross but the lower part of the circle was pruned.

   KE (P36, AB44, CA19, CC107 105, C KE) is a structure, possibly a booth or a shrine, or a stage for actors, skênê (initial s in a consonant cluster would not be represented in this writing system); the disc above it may be the sun, suggesting skias, a shady covering, “pavilion”.

   KI (P57, AB67, CC70, C KI) is obviously a stringed musical instrument (though it came to look like a drinking vessel), and thus kithara, “lyre”,

   KO (P62, AB70, CA10, CC21, C KO) flat-headed nail, gomphos, equivalent to alphabetic Waw.

   KU (P18, AB81, CC110, C KU) looks like a bird in flight (in its AB form), but on closer examination it must be the head of a dog in profile, with an eye and a protruding tongue (P18); the Greek word for “dog” is kuôn. The Cyprian form is on its side, with the tongue pointing upwards.

   KRA (P82, AB34, A308?) represents an eye with its pupil, Greek glênê.

   KRO  (P63 64, A326? 329? B35) depicts a cord wound on a stick (the origin of Q in the alphabet, from qaw, a line); the stick was eventually bent to make B35 (KRO) look like B34 (KRA), but they have opposite forms; they are usually regarded as unidentified.

   LA (CC87, from A60 RA).

   LE (CC76, a new creation; C LE resembles 8).

   LI (CC 9, from A53 RI).

   LO (CC5, from A2 RO).

   LU (CC 24, a new formation).

   MA (AB80, CC43, 49, 52, 53, C MA) is undoubtedly a cat (as also PD29) and the MA might be the sound of its mewing (mao); ME, MI, and MU apparently have a similar origin in animal vocalisation); but there are not many cat-glyphs in the pictophonic inventory (*P97); possibly the ma-syllable was first represented by a breast-glyph (P34a, see also PE, P34b), mastos or malon (Doric).

   ME (P16, AB13, CC35, C ME) the head of a sheep with horns; perhaps mêlon “sheep” (or sometimes goat), or mêkas (mêkaomai,“bleat”, of sheep or goat), as MA (cat), MI (bird), MU (cow) are apparently derived from animal sounds. The P16 collection of goats and sheep may include AI and QI.

   MI (P13b, AB73, CC91 89 90, C MI) is a bird with its beak open and vocalising, evoking minurisma, “warbling”; note that the P13 collection includes some animal heads, notably pig (P13a, P17, AB85, AU) and some bovines (P13c, P14).

   MO (P68, A321?, B15, CC73, C MO) is enigmatic; P68 might be a variant of TE (tree), but it could be a spine with ribs, like the Egyptian djed column, symbolizing “stability”, and this would match Greek monimos, “stable, steadfast”; the Cyprian forms support this view.

   MU (P12, AB23, CA5. CC55, 39, 42, 54, C MU) is a bovine head in profile, with horn and ear, and suggests mukêma, “bellowing”; the Cyprian forms seem to have moved to a frontal view; see QO.

   NA (P78, AB6, CA4, CC8, C NA) represents an eye with a flow (nama) of tears (Sophocles: dakruôn therma nama); the Phaistos Disc equivalent (PD3) has a man’s head with two tears on his cheek, and it also appears on PH Wc 45.

   NE (P52, AB24, CA20, CC2, 18, 34, 56, C NE) is a libation vessel with handle and spout; possibly from nektar, the drink of the gods; on KH 53 it stands beside the BEER mug with strainer.

   NI (P24, AB30, CA16, CC99, 100, 65, C NI) a fig tree, Cretan Greek nikuleon, “fig”.

   NO (P8, A28b, (A)B52, CC17, C NO) is an upraised hand, showing fingers and thumb, and this is clear enough in the Linear B forms; but Linear A NO  and I have been catalogued together in slot 28; they may now be distinguished as AB52 and AB28 respectively; the acrophonic origin may be in nomos, “law”, specifically kheirôn nomos, “law of force” (kheir, “hand”, hence the hand-sign for NO).

   NU (P9, AB55, CA12, CC68, 103, C NU) is a pair of vertical lines joined at the halfway point by a pair of horizontal bars, but also found with curved strokes; it seems to be derived from a hand pictogram (P9) with thumb but no fingers shown, and having two horizontal lines at the base, and so it looks like a mitten (cp. PD8); another example (P83) is closer to the stylized forms of AB55.

   NWA (P6, B48) two hands.

   NAU? (AB36).

   PA (P40, AB3, CC6, C PA) is possibly P40, a ship with its rigging (baris, “an Egyptian boat”?) but it is reduced to a mast with two horizontal strokes.                                                                                                     

   PE (P34b? A305, B72, CC11, C PE) appears to be a fetter (cp. PD14), Greek pedê; but its features are lost in transition.

   PI (P20 21 22 79 90, AB39, CC51, 52, C PI) is a bee (Indo-European *bhi, Latin apis); also PD34.

   PO (P43, AB11, CC12, 14, C PO) is certainly an ax (cp. A as a double ax, and PD15); pelekus is a word for “ax” that may or may not be relevant here; likewise bolis, “missile”.

   PU (P49, AB50, CC61, 23, C PU) is a stringed musical instrument; possibly phormingx, a seven-stringed lyre; or burtê, a rare synonym for lyra,“lyre” (Hesukhios). The Cyprian sign may be a development of  AB29; see PHU.

   PHU/BU (P30? AB29) from phulia, “wild olive’?

   PTE (P168? B62) pteruks, “wing”?

   QA (P44, AB16) could be a sauce boat, end view, with the two handles protruding.

   QE (P73 74 75, AB78) a circular object, either a ring or a circle with one or more dots, suggesting a ring, a shield, a pancake (cp. Luwian glyph 181 PANIS), and it may have a connection with kyklos (kwekwlo) “circle”, with extended meanings such as ring and shield.

   QI (AB21) apparently a goat; cp. AI and ME, and also PD30.

   QO (P11, B32, A345?) frontal view of a bovine head (cp. MU, profile), from bous (gwou), “ox, bull. cow”.

   QU (not attested?).

   RA (P7, AB60, CA1, CC87, 88, C LA) a human arm, with the forearm and hand horizontal; Greek brakhiôn means “arm”, but the initial b might block this as supplying acrophonic RA.

   RE (P23, AB27, CC33, C RE) a lily (leirion); neither Cyprian LE nor RE looks like the AB sign.

   RI (P10, AB53, CC9, C LI) a human leg (cp. PD28, an animal leg).

   RO (P70, AB2, CA7, CC5, C LO) is a cross; A2 is usually +, but B2 has the centre line elongated at both ends; P70 is the corresponding pictograph; the acrophonic source could be rhombos, something that can twirl, such as a spinning top; B68 (RO2, ryo) could be the same thing.

   RU (P92, AB26) is a lampstand (lukhnia) with two branches. In the Cyprus syllabary, RU (CA 11, CC 28) has an umbrella shape (rather than an umbrella blown inside out, in the Cretan form); Cyprian LU (CC24) is similar, but apparently a new creation.

   RAI (B76)

   RYA (P69, P71, A314, AB76) apparently a flowing stream, rheô (“flow”).

   RYO (B68) see RO.

   SA (P19, AB31, CA3, CC82, 57, 16, 48, C SA) is a squid, a cuttle-fish (sêpia).

   SE (P26, P3?, AB9, CA14, CC44,45, C SE) a plant, perhaps parsley (selinon), used for a victor’s crown in games (see P3, where it is on a human head).

   SI (P55, AB41, CC27 58, C SI) a tripod vessel containing a stalk of wheat (sitos).

   SO (P46. P80, P87, A301, A324, AB12, CC67, 60, C SO) has long remained unrecognized, but the adz of the craftsman is detectable; sophia means skill in arts and crafts, as well as wisdom. The Cyprus sign apparently has the tool turned on its side.

   SU (P35. AB5) appears to be a pig-sty (supheos). For Cyprian SU, see DU.

   SWA? (B82)

   SWE? (AB49)

   SWI? (B64)

   TA (P56, AB59) is a writing tablet; Greek tabella and tablion are perhaps too late, but trapeza might suffice. For Cyprian TA, see DA.

   TE (P25, AB4, CA13, CC7 62, C TE) is a tree (as perhaps in terebinthos, turpentine-tree, or possibly connected to dendron), originally with branches reaching upwards, but eventually outwards (like a telegraph pole).

   TI (P49, P93, AB37, CA15, CC23, C TI) is a pointed instrument, conjuring up the stig root (stigeus, “brander”, stigma,“puncture mark”, stizô, “prick” or “brand”).

   TO (P48, AB5, CC13 78, C TO) is a bow (toxon) with an arrow, but the curve was straightened, and the string was reduced to a small stroke (cp. PD11, a bow with no arrow).

   TU (P77, AB69, CC26 30 31 32, C TU) is a depiction of hanging fruit, ripe and ready for gathering (trugê); the verb trugaô means “gather in ripe fruits” (including grapes and grains); but a better acrophonic source might be found.

   TWE (B87)

   TWO (B91)

   TYA (P84? AB66)

   WA (P41, AB54, CA6, CC95, C WA) looks like cloth on a loom, so a connection with a weave word (root wa-?) seems likely.

   WE (P61, A319, B75, CC 1, C WE) seems to be a worm or snake (P61) and Latin vermis has the required WE (cp. PD42, a caterpillar?); B75 has the shape of a reversed S; and A319 is like capital I, the form that appears consistently in the Cyprus scripts; both are derived from an original oblique Z form.

   WI (P85, AB40, CC41 37, C WI)

   WO (P2? AB180, B42, CC29 41, C WO) a razor (cp. PD44)?

   WU (not found)

   YA (P38, AB57, CA8, CC69 71 72?, C YA) is clearly a door, and Latin ianua has to be invoked here for the ancient root ya (“go”), which occurs as ienai (“go”) in YE (AB46, a person walking).

   YE (P4?, P91?, AB46, CC36) a walker (cp. PD1); see YA.

   YI (AB47?, CC40?) a combination of o and x, with the arms protruding.

   YO (P54, A349, B36, CC98, C YO) a vessel with two handles.

   YU (uncertain, possibly AB65; no Cyprian syllabogram); YU is found together with U on tablets HT 117a and 122b.

   ZA  (AB17) the Egyptian symbol of life (‘ankh), Greek zaô, “live”, zôê, “life”.

   ZE (P45, AB74, CC88 86 93 92, C ZE) a saw (kseô, “plane”?) or a comb (ksainô, “card wool”?).

   ZI (not identified)

   ZO (P51, A312, AB20) a sculptor’s chisel (ksois)? (CC59 and C ZO are different).

   ZU (P81? AB79)

[1] P: Olivier and Godet 1996 (Corpus): 17, 19, 386-429.
[2] PD: Evans 1909: 22-28, 273-293, 276 (table of signs); Duhoux 1977; Fischer 1988; Faucounau 1999: 10 (table), 65-105 (signs). Colless:https://sites.google.com/site/collesseum/phaistosscript
[3] LA: Godart and Olivier 1976-1985 (Recueil) Vol. 5, XXII –LVII.
[4] LB: Ventris and Chadwick 1973 (Documents): 41, 385.
[5] AB: Godart and Olivier 1976-1985 (Recueil) Vol. 5, XXII.
[6] CA: Emilia Masson’s numbering is revised for citation purposes in Olivier 2007: 412 (Nos 1-21).
[7] CC: E. Masson1974: 12-15, Figures 2-4; Olivier 2007: 413-415; Ferrara 2012: 255:Table 5:10, “A tentative standardized signs repertoire”; both Olivier and Ferrara have arbitrarily reduced the number of signs on their tables; but until we know the sound-value of every sign and can dispense with numbering, Masson’s full set of numbers must remain in use.
[8] LC: O. Masson 1983: Figures 1-6.

My studies on the ancient scripts of the lands in and around the Mediterranean Sea (West Asia, North Africa, Europe, Cyclades, Crete, Cyprus) have been life-long, but my first publication on the subject dates from 1988: it is an attempt to identify the original picture-signs (pictophonograms,  picture-symbols representing a unit of speech, either a syllable or a single sound) that produced the various letters of the Semitic (Phoenician, Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabian) and Greco-Roman alphabets. Preceding this simple writing system, which was a consonantary (indicating consonants but not vowels), and which I call the protoalphabet, there was also a pictophonographic syllabary used in the West Semitic region (notably at Byblos), and this syllabic system was in use in the 23rd century BCE, before the invention of the West Semitic protoalphabet and before writing appeared in Crete. My working hypothesis is that the West Semitic syllabary provided the model for the Aegean systems, and also for the Luwian script ('hieroglyphic Hittite') of Anatolia, and even the Meso-American writing systems, including the Mayan logosyllabary.
   There were four syllabic scripts used on Crete in the Bronze Age (before 1200 BCE approximately). In the subsequent Iron Age, the Phoenician and Greek alphabets were employed, and the syllabaries were discarded (though in Cyprus a syllabary based on the Cretan script, specifically Linear A, continued to flourish).
The three main Cretan systems were related, as a genealogical family.
(1) Pictophonographic syllabary (PA) > (2) Linear A syllabary (LA) > (3) Linear B syllabary (LB).
(4) The fourth script was another pictophonographic syllabary (PB), which is found on the Phaistos Disc and on other documents, and which seems to be related to the other family (at least to the extent that they have many of their pictorial characters in common).
We can speak of a northern pictophonographic script (KnP, particularly connected with the palaces of Knossos and Mallia) and a southern pictophonographic script (PhP, connected with the Phaistos palace). When the Linear A syllabary was established (as a stylized simplified form of the pictophonographic system) it became universal over the island, and (somewhat paradoxically) the largest corpus of administrative tablets (that have so far been discovered) comes from Hagia Triada, near Phaistos.
   I refrain from applying the term 'hieroglyphic' to the pictophonographic signs; it is a word that should be restricted to Egyptology; it leaves the Phaistos pictophonographs out of the picture; they are all pictorial signs, with nothing 'holy' (hieros) about them.
   It must also be remembered that the three main systems (northern PG, LA, LB) are found beyond Crete, and it is not inconceivable that the original Aegean script was invented on the mainland (Greece) or on another island. An example of the northern pictophonographic writing was found in Kea/Keos, an island east of Athens; it is an impression on a hearth rim; and also Linear A inscriptions. This fact provides support for my hypothesis that this system was constructed acrophonically on the basis of a Hellenic dialect (examples: A axinê 'ax', O ops 'eye', TO toxon 'bow'; NI nikuleon 'fig', a Cretan word).
   The signs in the 'linear' forms (LA, LB, and Linear C in Cyprus) are known to have functioned as 'syllabograms' (and also as 'logograms' in LA and LB).
   Two tables are offered here: the first (Cretan Syllabograms) shows my attempt to match up the signs of the three northern systems (PG, LA , LB, as P, A, B), on the principle that the pictorial signs become stylized in the Linear A inventory, and even more so in Linear B; the second table (Cretan Pictosyllabograms) presents the signs of the northern pictophonographic syllabograms.
The P standing for pictophonographic is actually KnP (Knossos P) in the northern context; when it has to be distinguished from the southern script, KnP and PhP (Phaistos P) will be used.
A paradox is that although the Linear A script evolved out of the northern picto-syllabary, the largest collection of Linear A administrative tablets comes from Hagia Triada, adjacent to Phaistos; while Knossos and Mallia have yielded only a few fragmentary clay tablets. However, at Phaistos there are tablets exhibiting the southern script (Phaistos syllabary) as well as the northern Linear A script.
Notice that I reject the defeatist nonsense that there were not many Consonant+O signs in Linear A; supposedly lacking were so, do, dwo, mo, qo, yo, wo, no, two, ryo, zo, though o, po, to, ko, ro were grudgingly accepted onto the table; but it is true that they were not used frequently, and this says something about the language or languages in the Linear A texts.

A    AB8     P42  (ax)  [axinê]
AI    B43 A306 [aix goat?] (cp ME and QI?) (#016 AI-TA-TI?)
AU  AB85 P17 P13b (pig) [hus?] (autoboulos, self-willed, pig-headed?!)
HA  B25 (cp Phaistos 10, arrow?) A368?
E    AB38   P28   (hair, crest) [etheira]
I    AB28    P31    (olive) [hiketeria elaia suppliant olive branch]
O    AB61    P5    (eye) [ops, omma, oculus]
U    AB10    P95   (hedgehog) [hustrix]
YA   AB57   P38   (door) [Latin ianua, Sanskrit go]
YE   AB46   P4?   (walking) [ienai going, Sanskrit go]
YI   AB47?
YO  B36 A349  P54 (amphora)
YU   AB65?
WA   AB54    P41    (cloth)
WE    B75 A319      P61  (worm) [werm]  
WI    AB40    P85?       
WO   B42/AB180?  A363? A364? P2? (razor)
RA    AB60       P7   (arm) [labôn taking with the hand??]
RYA    B76        P69?   (water-course)     (cp reô flow, roê stream?)
RAI   B33  (same as saffron logogram)
RE    AB27       P23   (lily) [leirion]
RI     AB53       P10   (leg)
RO    AB2         P70   (cross) [rhombos?]
RYO   AB68      P40   (ship? spinning top?) [rhombos?]
RU    AB26       P92    (lamp) [lukhnia menorah]
MA    AB80 (cat) P34 (breasts?) [masta, mala breasts] replaced by P97 (cat) [ma, meow]?
ME    AB13        P16  (sheep) [mêlon, mêkas bleating]
MI     AB73       P13a?  (bird-head?) [minurisma bird-warbling] (or P7 [arm] is not RA?) 
MO    B15  A321 A327 (cp Cyprian MO, and Egyptian djed)  P68 (spine?) [monimos stable]
MU    AB23        P12    (cow) [mukaomai, mukêma, moo-cow bellowing]
NA    AB6          P78    (tearflow) [nama] (dakruôn therma nama Sophokles)
NWA   B48       P6    (crossed arms) (neozeuktos newly-yoked, newly-wed?!)
NE    AB24        P52 + P53 (libation vessel) [nektar divine drink]
NI     AB30        P24    (fig) [nikuleon] (a Cretan word)
NO    B52 A28b P8    (hand) [nomos law] (kheirôn nomos law of force)
NU    AB55        P9 +83?  (glove?) 
PA    AB3          P40? (ship) [baris Egyptian boat]
PE    B72 A305?     P34b? (fetter) [pedê]
PI     AB39        P20 21 22 79 90  (bee)
PO    AB11        P43  (ax)  [pelekus?]
PU    AB50 A369?    P58  (lyre)  [burtê]  
TA    AB59        P56 (tablet) [trapeza, tabula] 
TE    AB4         P25   (tree) [tere-, as in terebinthos]
TI     AB37       P49 +93 (brander) [stigeus puncturing tool]
TO    AB5        P48 (bow and arrow) [toxon]
TU    B69        P77  (fruit)
DA    AB1        P27, 29    (twig) [thalos]
DE    AB45      P37, 94?   (house/tomb) [demein build; thêkê container, grave]
DI     AB7        P39? (= B64?) (netting?) [diktuon]
DO    B14 A304?   P50    (spear?) [doru]
DU    AB51        P59 +60? (crook) [dunastês power-wielder]
KA    AB77        P47    (cane basket)  [kaneon]
KE    AB44        P36    (pavilion)  [skênê]
KI     AB67       P57  (lyre) [kithara]
KO    AB70       P62    P51   (nail)  [gomphos, wedge-shaped nail]
KU    AB81       P18     (dog) [kuôn]       
QA    AB16       P44  (bolt-pin for bar of gate? or key?) [balanos, balanagra key]?
QE    AB78       P73-75   (circular object) [kuklos, kwekwlo]
QI     AB21       P14? P54b?   (animal?)   
QO    B32 B18?  A333? A345? A347?    P11 (bull)  [bous, gwou]
SA    AB31       P19 (cuttlefish, kalamari) [sêpia]
SE    AB9         P26 +3? (parsley, for victor's crown) [selinon]
SI     AB41       P55    (grain in container) [sitos]  
SO    B12 A301? P46 +80 +87   (adz) [sophia craftsmanship? skeparnon adz?]    
SU    AB58       P35 (enclosure) [supheos pig-sty]  
ZA    AB17  B19?      (Egyptian `ankh symbol, life) [zaein, zôê]
ZE    AB74        P45   (saw? comb?) [xainô comb, card; xeô plane, carve)
ZO    AB20  A312?      P51? P85 (WI)?  (chisel? sword?) [xois sculptor's chisel]  P51=LA36
ZU    AB79?        P81?        (sun with rays?)
RYA    B76        P69?        P69
RYO    B68                    P40
NWA   B48    006    P6    P6
NAU    B86?            P40?     P40
PA3     B56                        P39
PU2     B29            P30? P32?
TYA      B66            P84, P72?
KRA     B34            P82  [glênê eyeball, pupil]
KRO    B35            P63 P64  [klôstêr thread, line]         
SWI?    B64            P39? DI?

    CHIC  Brian Colless   (John Younger)
    001    seated human
    002    head? (razor? WO cp P88?)       
    003    head +026     SE (= 026)?
    004    upright human YE? DWE?     
    005    eye    O    (Rv)
    006     *X*  2 arms  NWA      (NWA)
    007    bent arm   RA/LA  (MI)    [MI 013? 057?]
    008    hand  NO  (A3)
    009    glove?  NU 009 +083? (A2)
    010    leg     RI  (RI)
    011    bovine head  (front)  QO (SI2) [11-16 mixed animals]
    012    bovine head  (side)   MU (MU)
    013    animal snout? (mixed?)  MI (MU2) [some 013? +015?]
    014    animal head    QI?  (I)
    015    animal snout (1x)   MI?  +013?  (DU?)     
    016    horned head    ME   (KI2)
    017    pig head      AU (AU)
    018    dog head + tongue  KU  (RA)           
    019    cuttlefish, sepia      SA  (SA)
    020    bee      PI  (AI)     [PI 020-022 +033? 079? 090?]
    021    bee      PI  (PI)
    022    bee      PI 
    023    lily flower? RE/LE   (TO)
    024    fig tree?     NI  (NI)
    025    tree?          TE  (TE)
    026      _(_(_(_(   SE             [SE 026 +003?]
    027      |/ (3x)     DA? (= 029?)
    028    hair crest    (KU2)
    029    double twig DA (MA)   [DA 27 + 29?]
    030    \}/  (1x)     DA? PU2 (phu)? (PU2)
    031    \|/    I 031? +032?  (RE)     
    032    \!/ (9x)       PU2 (phu)?  (RE2)
    033    }.{ (3x)      ZU? +81
    034    fetters? breasts?  PE +ME? (TA)
    035    pig-pen?       SU (SU)
    036    pavilion         KE (SA2)
    037    house/tomb   DE 037 + 094? (Rv)  [cp PhDisc 24]
    038    door + post    YA (JA)
    039    netting/trellis  DI  (PA3)             DI 039? (=LinB64?)
    040    ship               PA  (RO2)          
    041    cloth?            WA (WA)
    042    double ax       A  (A)
    043    ax                 PO (SO)
    044    metal object   QA (KO)
    045    saw                ZE (ZE)
    046    adz                SO 046 + 080 + 087  ( )
    047    cane basket    KA (QE)
    048    bow & arrow   TO [1x]  ( )                    
    049    /|\                 TI      (RO3)      TI 049 + 093?
    050    spear?            DO  (TI)
    051    dagger? chisel? ZO? (KI3)
    052    ewer                NE  (NE)            
    053    jug                  NE      (KI?)
    054    amphora (2 rams?) YO?     (DE)     YO? +MA? +QI? 
    055    grain vessel?     SI   (KE)              
    056     talent? tablet?  TA    (KU)           
    057      V+  kithara      KI  (KI)          
    058     lyre                  PU (PU)              
    059     crook                DU                DU 059 +060?
    060        |\                  DU?
    061     snake? worm?   WE   or = RI 010?
    062    ___.     KO
    063    _._        KRO?
    064    --o--        KRO?  (DA)
    065    .__.        ?
    066    ||          PA?
    067    *||*        HA?
    068    spine?     MO     (Rv)                  
    069    ZZ        RYA?
    070   cross  +  x             RO (RO)          
    071    }}}       RYA?
    072    triangle   TYA??         (KA)
    073    circle        QE 073? +74 +75
    075    circle (dotted)      QE 075 (1x) + 074 (1x)
    076    ?        YU?
    077    fruit      TU   (RU2)                       MA? ME? NI?
    078    eye and tear-flow?  NA (DO)                             
    079    bee?        PI? (= 020)    
    080    adz        SO (= 046)
    081    (1x)        ZU?
    082    eyeball?        KRA?
    083    (=009?) (1x)        NU?
    084            TYA? TWO?
    085     /+\    WI? (WI)
    086            QO? (= 068?)
    087    adz        SO (= 046)
    088         [razor?     WO? RI =002?
    089    X         YE? PE? RI?
    090    bee?        PI? (= 020)
    091    ^^^        ?
    092    lamp?       RU    (RU)
    093    /|\        TI (= 049) (TI)
    094    /=\        DE? (= 037)
    (097)     (cat)        MA? (MA)

What you see here is a host of hypotheses struggling to become a grand unified theory.

This is a revised and expanded version of my release entitled "Table of Cretan pictoglyphs" (28 July 2003), providing a description or drawing of the characters, and an attempt to match them with their counterparts in the Linear B inventory.

The prefix 'P' stands for 'pictosyllabogram' (or 'pictophonogram'), with the CHIC numbering.