Forget Sumeria. It's impossible to decipher an unknown language

RecycledSoul

Well-known member
Messages
142
Reactions
289
I agree with OP. It's impossible to decipher if you cannot relate to it.

Also, if people were far more intelligent in the past and we were more connected to the earth and its frequencies then who is to say that people even spoke verbally or wrote things down? For what? Writing seems primitive compared to their achievements.

For example this image that KD posted: Where does one even begin regardless of how intelligent one is?

If this is suppose to be the "oldest language" then there is nothing to relate it to or base it on and how did it become so complex?

View attachment 25834

If I had to try and decipher this, I would most likely end up in an asylum.

This could mean anything. My guess is musical notation.

View attachment 25836

This is how I would base my assumption according to that which I can relate to:

*Every symbol has a triangle or engraved pyramid in it which means it could represent the numbers: 3 (base) or 4 (points) or 5 (surfaces).
*If it were music and was related to the alphabet then its a repetition of the notes C, D and E.
*The long line on the triangle could be the length/duration of the note
*The way the symbols are grouped and the succession thereof does in a way form scales

*If this was music then it is a highly complex piece
Excellent observation! I took piano lessons as a kid and played Clarinet in high school. I absolutely agree!
 

irishbalt

Active member
Messages
71
Reactions
169
This is a Text by a german Linguist called Eduard Landmann, which has controversy Theorys about the real decryption of older languages. He is widly ignored by the establishment. Normaly this means , he are right ;-)
One of his claims is, no one can decrypt an unknown language, exept you have a rosetta stone.
He also has decrypte ..huhuhu , the mystical Voynich Manuscript, whitch is in real only "old high German" also called "theodiske spraha" (spraha = language)
As he says, its like in other science areas, you only need to implant a bogus method/theory, then teach it to students, and everything rolls from alone. Especially you only award the works that fit in your narrativ.

Forget Sumeria!
by Erhard Landmann translated by Joska Ramelow

The mishandling of clay tablets and the invention of the wedges for cuneiform scripture.

Some years ago I received a letter from a rather irate gentlemen, who I had written to expressing my point that there never existed a Sumerian, Assyrian or Babylonian culture, thus, he totally misunderstood the point I was making and asked back in a manner close to outrage: "Do you mean to say that the many old style buildings (Ishtar Gate, Ziggurat of Ur) and the hundreds of thousands of cuneiform clay tablets never existed?'' Of course I did not assert that there were no ancient buildings or clay tablets even still uncovered to this day in the location of Mesopotamia between the two mighty rivers Euphrates and Tigris..

I just wanted to say that the cultures known today as 'Sumerian' or 'Babylonian' never existed together with the Sumerian and Assyrian language.
This is on the strength of my discovery that the clay tablets ended up totally wrongly handled, and thus, translated. This leads to a string of constant errors to the point of incomprehension and fabrication of stories mostly reflecting the flowery fantasy of the 'cuneiform expert' interpretors. Why?

As early as 1948 Alice Kober correctly noted deciphering an unknown font in an unknown language is impossible. It is simple logic that an unknown script of an unknown language never heard spoken, cannot be rendered properly, other than by hit and miss guesswork, subject to the imagination of the expert. When I asked one of these famous archaeologist decipherers, that an unknown language in an unknown writing cannot properly be deciphered he agreed, but pointed out that related languages that had been 'deciphered' were useful to help in the task of tackling this problem.

I inferred that the very 'deciphered' languages originally had suffered the same problem, he retorted that there were also 'third' and 'fourth' languages that had already been 'studied' that had yielded enough information to decipher the unknown script and language, obviously, not getting the point. So easy, and yet so illogical the challenge can be to even try to get answers to the first question from these gentlemen.

So if it is impossible to decipher an unknown script in an unknown language in first place and then simply to resort to a second, third or fourth unknown script in an unknown language which apparently had been "deciphered" (which, in my opinion, is an impossibility to the highest degree ) is trying to pot a square peg into a round hole. In consequence there are enough gullible people who believe that everything they are told in this world, whether it is in politics as well as on the campus of the pseudo-sciences.

Some years ago during the lectures to my book “worldpicture shuttering” , some people were adamant in denying that it would be impossible to decipher an unknown script in an unknown language. (and the most stubborn ones are often times the very ones who have actually studied the subject the least and, thus, do know but simply believe) I made the following suggestion to my audience: I wrote down some Japanese phrases in Kanji (Chinese characters) on the blackboard and asked the audience relax, take your time and try and guess what they mean. Then I asked two questions:

whether a) are they Japanese or Chinese sentences?

And b) how the characters would sound?

and c) what were the meaning of these phrases?

(The multiple interpretations and multiple tonalities of Kanji characters, sometimes triple, Four times, or even more , I did not even mention) Although I did not show an unknown script and language, but for the sake of the exercise it was unknown to the audience. None of the participants was in a position to even fathom anything close to resolving this issue. This exercise produced a stunned silence in the lecture hall, since even the most stubborn gainsayers recognized the inherent problem.

Incidentally, you can try this test for yourself at home when you are not conversant in either Japanese or Chinese language. The characters can today be found without big trouble everywhere on the internet. The gentlemen experts of cuneiform and "Sumerian experts'' will by all accounts remain unperturbed and retain their expert composure. It is more likely that the camp followers of Sitchin et. al., who may admit that many things are not quite right with the translations, they will be screaming outrage the loudest, after they have spooned up the nonsense in a re-interpreted 'ultimate' form. But when I accept nonsense for real and only add a new interpretation, then, according to simple mathematical arithmetic we arrive at ' nonsense squared by nonsense'. So, please check out and weigh my photographic evidence in the images provided below to arrive at your own conclusion.

The beautiful thing is that these images do not come from me, but from a professional standard teaching manual about the treatment (preparation) of clay tablets in preserving cuneiform writing. This volume was written by the very people who carry out this type of specialist treatment. Firstly, the clay tablets are being unearthed, unfired, encrusted with dirt and salts from the soil they were found in. Secondly the with encrusted materials are washed (!!) and brushed off. During this process the odd pieces get rubbed off or things simply break off (!!).

Figure 1 shows the very same clay tablets, at the top before, and below after treatment. The large plain areas on the tablets clearly indicate that a lot of data has been lost during he first phase of treatment. Subsequent to this the tablets in expert care are completely (Completely !!!) smeared over with a solidifying paste. This is shown in Figure 2a, 2b and 2c.

Then the tablets get fired the tablets get scratched free again, as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 4 shows a partially freed clay tablet on the surface of which (please check very closely), not a single "wedge" as such is visible. Certainly not the type of wedge we are suddenly treated to in Figure 5. Here the mirror image casts suddenly reveal
'sim sala bim' wondrous cuneiform wedges. These then are the basis for our expert decipherers to come up with the amazing script and language results they all discuss busily amongst themselves.

( For Figure 5, I had to consult another book, because the final products of the process containing the wedge shaped writings were not shown in the first book). You can view thousands of clay tablets, you will not find a single cuneiform wedge. The books, however, that are for reading the script are full of wedges, as are found in Figure 5.

Once you have established the self-created wedges and declared it to be a font, you can make up any system you like. (This is the same for the so-called Mayan calendar, where some hieroglyphs that one could not read were simply declared numbers and hey presto, we have found the "calendrical glyphs" of the Mayan culture. Albeit, there are clearly numbers as we know them today on the very same panel. It is the old
adage when a system is based on a lie to begin with then it's inherent logic becomes self propagating for a long time to come).

Having got that far you invent a "Writing system" for corresponding languages that never existed such as Sumerian, Assyrian, Hittite and so on. (By the way, at this juncture you may enter the bidding process if you want to strike it famous, Since you may enter Urukitian for the City of U-ruk or Bablebaeic or some such?). Likewise, is it not the case that with the Invention of the Sumerian, Assyrian, Hittite languages, the inventors considered the languages perfect, 'that stood the test of time' for decades and centuries and many students of respective 'cultures' found new words and phrases that were added to the canon of their respective 'expert field'. Also, if they could not agree amongst themselves and disputed other respective 'experts' insights and prevailed with their view after all, then their doctorates or professorships were gained as academic titles in the most meritorious and 'deserving' manner.

Let's take for example the case of the adepts of the Zecharia Sitchin myth of the
popular planet "Nibiru". I do not know whether there actually exists a planet, with the
defined properties attributed to this mysterious "planet"
To determine this would definitely be the responsibility of our Astronomers, although
I'm well aware, that our astronomers are not inclined to tell us all there is to know
from what they observe. But two things are certain: if there is such a
planet, none of the clay tablets ever related it's existence in any shape of form. It is
also certain that, 'whatever-it-is', has never been called Nibiru. Also the feeble minded
nonsense of the "Anunaki" (derived from "naked ancestor"?), unfortunately very
difficult to erase from the mindset of people. And by the way, the real truth about the
ancient cultures for the survival of mankind is by magnitudes more important as for
example he hysteria of global warming , which in the most nonsensical way makes us
believe that the 0.03% man-made rise of C02 so important for plant growth, is the
basic challenge to mankind.

....... (shortened by HengistErbse)

Good bye Marduk and Gilgamesh, adieu Enki and Enuma Elish, adiós Anunaki and
Ninurtam; bye bye, Nibiru and the fantastic nonsense in the 5th and 6th Potency,
good bye also patriarch Abraham.
Forget Sumeria! Forget Assyria, Babylon and Chaldea!
But do not forget the "ass from the Ur in Space ", do not forget the rushing to the
skies Bab, the "Bab ylon", do not forget the cold Ea, the "cold Galaxy Ur in space"

Figure 1

View attachment 7533

Figure 2 a b c

View attachment 7534

Figure 3

View attachment 7535

Figure 4

View attachment 7536


Figure 5

View attachment 7537


Link to original PDF by Eduard Landmann

Great post! Yes, it must be BS. What a bunch of rent seeking cretins, who need to be called out as the scammers they are!
 

UnusualBean

Well-known member
Messages
256
Reactions
969
I'm not saying it's impossible, but I'm also not wholly convinced that a person (or even a genius AI) could decipher a language with absolutely no frame of reference. Let's do a small exercise with Chinese, since it was brought up before as an example of an intuitive writing system.

Try to guess what this means:

當我看著紅色的東西,我餓了。

...

...

...

Any luck? I'm going to go out on a limb and say no. Literally none of those characters in their current forms look anything like what they represent. With no frame of reference, it's basically just lines and squiggles.

Just for fun though, let's pretend we have a Rosetta Stone with the English translation on it:

"When I looked at the red stuff, I got hungry."

Having that frame of reference, try to guess what each individual character means.

...

...

...

Whatever you got, it probably wasn't "when I see continuous red color possess east west, I hungry completed."

Yeah.
 

Jim Duyer

Well-known member
Messages
179
Reactions
464
I agree with OP. It's impossible to decipher if you cannot relate to it.

Also, if people were far more intelligent in the past and we were more connected to the earth and its frequencies then who is to say that people even spoke verbally or wrote things down? For what? Writing seems primitive compared to their achievements.

For example this image that KD posted: Where does one even begin regardless of how intelligent one is?

If this is suppose to be the "oldest language" then there is nothing to relate it to or base it on and how did it become so complex?

View attachment 25834

If I had to try and decipher this, I would most likely end up in an asylum.

This could mean anything. My guess is musical notation.

View attachment 25836

This is how I would base my assumption according to that which I can relate to:

*Every symbol has a triangle or engraved pyramid in it which means it could represent the numbers: 3 (base) or 4 (points) or 5 (surfaces).
*If it were music and was related to the alphabet then its a repetition of the notes C, D and E.
*The long line on the triangle could be the length/duration of the note
*The way the symbols are grouped and the succession thereof does in a way form scales

*If this was music then it is a highly complex piece
Yet it can be done - pieces much smaller than the accumulation of Sumerian texts have been broken. But here's the catch. You mention that it would give you a headache and that you could not do it. Neither could 99.99% of the rest of the world. The ones that can, and do, perform these translations, represent literally a handful of people around the world. Less than 50 in total. Unfortunately, that's the total amount of truly skilled ones at this time. I have done more than one, personally, and it truly is a gift and not something that is learned. Although whether or not it is a "good" gift remains to be seen.
 

irishbalt

Active member
Messages
71
Reactions
169
Yet it can be done - pieces much smaller than the accumulation of Sumerian texts have been broken. But here's the catch. You mention that it would give you a headache and that you could not do it. Neither could 99.99% of the rest of the world. The ones that can, and do, perform these translations, represent literally a handful of people around the world. Less than 50 in total. Unfortunately, that's the total amount of truly skilled ones at this time. I have done more than one, personally, and it truly is a gift and not something that is learned. Although whether or not it is a "good" gift remains to be seen.
Jim, with all respect, the poster and literature cited do make a good case to call BS or at least call into question the veracity of the current narratives regarding Sumerian translations. Is it really out of the question that such translations are not fakes?

Could you provide more information as to why these are good translations, why should we trust their authenticity?
 

codis

Well-known member
Messages
143
Reactions
323
ould you provide more information as to why these are good translations, why should we trust their authenticity?
Exactly. The "Snake Oil Seller" issue.
Shall we trust the pope who claims he has a direct line to god, and is his earthly representative ?
 

Prana

Member
Messages
13
Reactions
56
Yet it can be done - pieces much smaller than the accumulation of Sumerian texts have been broken. But here's the catch. You mention that it would give you a headache and that you could not do it. Neither could 99.99% of the rest of the world. The ones that can, and do, perform these translations, represent literally a handful of people around the world. Less than 50 in total. Unfortunately, that's the total amount of truly skilled ones at this time. I have done more than one, personally, and it truly is a gift and not something that is learned. Although whether or not it is a "good" gift remains to be seen.
I agree with what you are saying about the "gifted few" capable of translating such pieces. The problem is that I have learnt well not to trust them. We have all at one stage been blinded by intellectual elitism and that is exactly the case with deciphering such mysteries.

Then again, I still think most of these tablets are fake.

I still can't fathom why such an advanced civilisation would need to write such complex things on such primitive materials such as stone/clay.
Even in this day there is no need for writings things down.
 

tupperaware

Well-known member
Messages
239
Reactions
641
Speaking of language deciphering as often just an academic circle jerk... Here is a review of a potent study showing academics just simply "fail" in fundamental ways that render nearly all their work untrustworthy. The Peculiar Blindness of Experts

"In Tetlock’s 20-year study, both the broad foxes and the narrow hedgehogs were quick to let a successful prediction reinforce their beliefs. But when an outcome took them by surprise, foxes were much more likely to adjust their ideas. Hedgehogs barely budged. Some made authoritative predictions that turned out to be wildly wrong—then updated their theories in the wrong direction. They became even more convinced of the original beliefs that had led them astray. The best forecasters, by contrast, view their own ideas as hypotheses in need of testing. If they make a bet and lose, they embrace the logic of a loss just as they would the reinforcement of a win. This is called, in a word, learning. "


Philip E. Tetlock - Wikipedia
"Among the more surprising findings from the tournament were:
  1. the degree to which simple training exercises improved the accuracy of probabilistic judgments as measured by Brier scores;[3][4]
  2. the degree to which the best forecasters could learn to distinguish many degrees of uncertainty along the zero to 1.0 probability scale (many more distinctions than the traditional 7-point verbal scale used by the National Intelligence Council);[4][9]
  3. the consistency of the performance of the elite forecasters (superforecasters) across time and categories of questions;[4][5][6]
  4. the power of a log-odds extremizing aggregation algorithm to out-perform competitors;[7][8] and
  5. the apparent ability of GJP to generate probability estimates that were "reportedly 30% better than intelligence officers with access to actual classified information."[9]
"These and other findings are laid out in particularly accessible form in the Tetlock and Gardner (2015) book on "Superforecasting." The book also profiles several "superforecasters." The authors stress that good forecasting does not require powerful computers or arcane methods. It involves gathering evidence from a variety of sources, thinking probabilistically, working in teams, keeping score, and being willing to admit error and change course.""




Described are "superforecasters" useful of course to all sorts of government agencies. Even more useful to these agencies are artificial intelligence applications that become super superforecasters - trained by the superforecasters who then may have been good enough to forecast they would be fired.
 

Jim Duyer

Well-known member
Messages
179
Reactions
464
Jim, with all respect, the poster and literature cited do make a good case to call BS or at least call into question the veracity of the current narratives regarding Sumerian translations. Is it really out of the question that such translations are not fakes?

Could you provide more information as to why these are good translations, why should we trust their authenticity?
Oh Lord. I'm sorry that I did not present my answer in a clearer way. NO YOU CANNOT TRUST ANY OF THE TRANSLATIONS BY THE TRADITIONAL SCHOLARS. But you also can not trust some
of the amateurs, such as Sitchin. He translated Akkadian, that he was familiar with, and not
Sumerian, but everyone credits him with being some type of guru with Sumerian. I have never been able to confirm any of his translations, nor have I seen his work sheets or any reason that
his may be an acceptable meaning from the texts. So do your own work.

I just wanted to express the fact that some of the languages have indeed been broken, and usually by amateurs who the mainstream scholars would not even stoop down to spit upon. In fact, they called them every name in the book after they were forced to admit that someone who is not part of their select group actually accomplished more than they ever could. BUT as to the translations of the Sumerian, Mayan, Egyptian, and another other of the Ancient languages that you wish to mention, including Hebrew, Akkadian, and Minoan/Crete - the ones done by our "professionals" that appear in our textbooks are all slanted, biased, and twisted beyond belief by our trusted scholars. Most of the translations that I have seen are very clearly manipulated. So no, you can not trust the translations - we must learn to do it ourselves and spread the word among ourselves.

But, how can we "do it ourselves?". Well, why not? Let's do a very important one together.

I'm going to give you an example that is somewhat long, but will help to make my point clear.
I just finished this yesterday, and I am still putting it together, but here is another stolenhistory.org exclusive:

Look up in Google the riddle or puzzle of the so-called Sator Square.
It was done very early, and rewritten on columns and walls and even on monuments,
over a fifteen hundred year period in Europe. It was obviously very popular.

It's a palindrome, in Latin, and it goes like this: SATOR AREPO TENET OPERA ROTAS.
A Bishop in France from about 460s AD wrote about it, and so everyone credits it to him.
But it actually was written on the walls of Pompeii, which was destroyed in 79 AD, and based
upon linguistic analysis done by me, it probably has a much earlier Carthaginian/Phoenician origin. The evidence of that takes up twenty pages so just take my suggestion about the Phoenicians on faith if you will.

It has always been written thus:
S A T O R
A R E P O
T E N E T
O P E R A
R O T A S

You can see how the words appear in a type of "magical square" in that they can be read
from a multitude of directions. (The text may be read top-to-bottom, bottom-to-top, left-to-right, or right-to-left; and it may be rotated 180 degrees and still be read in all those ways. )

Its translation has been the subject of speculation with no clear consensus, but the one offered
by our mainstream atheist scholars is: Arepo the farmer works his wheels, or the farmer Arepo works wheels (a plough they tell us, but how many early ploughs had wheels?).


However, even Latin is subject to a great many interpretations, due to its very poor and loose language style and multiple definitions for a great many of its terms.

My translation of the surface words are based on the meanings given in the Latin dictionary:
Sator = sower, planter, begetter, father, creator, promoter, author, originator,
grounder, progenitor and especially divine progenitor.
Opera = trouble, pains, exertion, work, labor, care, aid, service, effort, trouble.
Tenet = to hold out, last, keep on, continue, persist, to continue on a course,
Rotas = wheel, wagon, disk of the sun or other celestial bodies, the wheel of fortune,
an indication of fickleness based upon the idea of a wheel of fate or fortune, to whirl around,
to revolve, rotate.
Arepo = they translate this as the name of some unknown person who does not appear
in the history of the World. I, however, see it as the reverse of Opera; in other words, telling
us to use the alternative definitions of Opera on this word, and the traditional ones on Opera.

So I give it: "The Creator maintains his service of toil and trouble - the fickleness of fate."

Can you all see the way that the traditional scholars figured out their definition, and the easy
method by which I can use the same words, same Latin meanings, and come up with a
much more profound and probably more accurate translation, based upon the fact that
the Romans of the Pompeii time period were very probably not yet Christians?

In fact, just before the volcano buried them, they were having a feast to a few gods, complete with the sacrifice of bulls and drinking of their blood. Some of the grafitti that they drew on the walls of Pompeii are covered over by the religious agenda archaeologists when they take people on tours, even to this date.

But even so, why would this be repeated over and over, from Italy to France, German, and even
in Britain (at Rivington Church in Lancashire, on an Anglo-Saxon font), and over a period of 1500 years? Neither of these is interesting enough to grab and hold the attention of the general population, although my translation might have been maintained by those in opposition to the Catholic church. I will provide for you, in just a moment, a more accurate translation, but in the meantime, let's look at other translations done by people with other agendas.

What do the Christians and especially the Catholics say?
They claim that if you place the words in the form of an early
cross, and ignore the fact that two letter n's would be needed, and then take eight of the
letters and place them outside of the cross, you have PATER NOSTER. or "Our Father",
completely ignoring the fact that they were found in pre-Christian Pompeii.

This is regurgitated on Christian sites over and over and over again, with little regard
to the truth. Also, as a side comment, I could take the same letters, remove one from
the center, and place eight on the sides out of the definition, and come up with
ELVIS PRESLEY RULES. No, just kidding, but you get my drift. If you are going to
start adding and removing letters to come up with an answer that meets your agenda,
you are already way outside of the rules of science and common sense.

OK, you have seen my "traditional style translation" offered for the scholars in the group,
and now it's time for the interesting translation - also known as the truth.

Let's look at the letters in the magical square. Which letters are used to write this square?
There are four each of the letters r, t, o, e, and a.
There are two each of the letters p and s, and one letter n. This gives us, as an
anagram, PRONATES.

Pro in Latin = befitting, like, for, on behalf of, about (and other similar terms).
(as in Pro-Bono, where a cheap lawyer works for free to get you placed in jail for a longer term)
Nates in Latin = buttocks, arse, rump, (you get the picture).
So an Anti-Catholic Anglo-Saxon in Britain could point to the Sator Square and say -
The Popish ones tell us it means Pater Noster, but thats "like arse."

But we shouldn't stop there.

Using the same letters, from the Latin dictionary we learn:
ter = three times, on three occasions
o = Oh!, (an interjection)
pan(i)s = bread, loaf, food, nourishment, sustenance.
So their Sator SQUARE relates to the idea of the "3 Squares a Day" that the farmer demanded.

But the real reason that it survived for all of those years, and is still somewhat
entertaining today, although in a childish sense, is this idea:

We also get, by using the appearance of the letters in the text:
Tora = plural of torum = swelling, swelling of the skin muscle,
also figuratively of power, strength,
also means: marriage, affair, spouse, lover, bed, sofa, pillow cushion
Rota = fickleness of the wheel of fortune, characterized by erratic changeableness
or instability, especially with regard to affections or attachments; capricious.
Pens = penes = the nominative plural form of the singular term "penis",
anatomically speaking the male sexual organ.

So we could use these definitions and come up with a translation of :

"The swelling of the penis is subject to the fickleness of fate; and is capricious in nature."

Now that, my friends, is funny enough to stick in the minds of our early ancestors
and be repeated over the ages. Think my translation will make the textbooks?

PS - supposedly, to this day, nobody has uncovered the true meaning or correct
translation of the SATOR SQUARE. I think you can see that we have, indeed,
several good translations, right here, and right now.

Jim
 
Last edited:

RowOfEleven

Well-known member
Messages
31
Reactions
100
Sorry to say but latin Is nothing more than a german dialect(?) . Enslaved and changed by Christians (?)
I will make an own Thread for that,there is a global universal language and the ancestors speak und understand that.
I hered a old Book where they say that american Tribes speak (old) german and that they have all the regularia that a christian have.
The Cross, and so on.
This is incredibly interesting. Please do make a thread on this if you haven't already!

I agree with OP. It's impossible to decipher if you cannot relate to it.

Also, if people were far more intelligent in the past and we were more connected to the earth and its frequencies then who is to say that people even spoke verbally or wrote things down? For what? Writing seems primitive compared to their achievements.

For example this image that KD posted: Where does one even begin regardless of how intelligent one is?

If this is suppose to be the "oldest language" then there is nothing to relate it to or base it on and how did it become so complex?


If I had to try and decipher this, I would most likely end up in an asylum.

This could mean anything. My guess is musical notation.


This is how I would base my assumption according to that which I can relate to:

*Every symbol has a triangle or engraved pyramid in it which means it could represent the numbers: 3 (base) or 4 (points) or 5 (surfaces).
*If it were music and was related to the alphabet then its a repetition of the notes C, D and E.
*The long line on the triangle could be the length/duration of the note
*The way the symbols are grouped and the succession thereof does in a way form scales

*If this was music then it is a highly complex piece
Maybe you have stumbled across this? The Hurrian Hymn is considered to be one of the oldest example of notated music we have discovered. Dated at approx 1300BC.


maxresdefault (1).jpg

image-asset.jpeg

As far as ancient musical manuscripts go, it's pretty scant. There are ample ms available starting in the middle ages, but next to nothing beyond that. I've always wondered why we have nothing from before the middle ages. We have plenty of lyrics for hymns that have no music to pair with them. As with the written word, written music seems to be a rather recent thing. Oral traditions weren't just stories, they were songs too. I suppose that could explain it, but I still wonder.

But, in any case, I've dug up a few other examples of "early" musical notation for everyones reference. Not a whole lot of similarity between the styles, but there is some. Just an interesting bit I thought I would add.

Here's another example of notation that pre-dates the musical staff (early Germanic, dated to approx 900AD)

24402F5200000578-2886145-Mystery_dong_It_is_thought_that_the_simple_score_that_is_is_dedi-a-14...jpg


And another example (Tibetan Yang Yig chant song)
tibetan-yang-yig-ms-5280-1_f.jpg

And one more, the oldest intact complete song is from Ancient Greece, called Seikilos Epitaph
seikilos-epitaph.jpg


 
Last edited:

Jim Duyer

Well-known member
Messages
179
Reactions
464
Sorry to say but latin Is nothing more than a german dialect(?) . Enslaved and changed by Christians (?)
I will make an own Thread for that,there is a global universal language and the ancestors speak und understand that.
I hered a old Book where they say that american Tribes speak (old) german and that they have all the regularia that a christian have.
The Cross, and so on.
I agree that this is very interesting, and I would love to learn more when you have the chance.
 

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,209
Reactions
16,775
This specific user has not visited for a while. I doubt that thread will ever be started. I kind of played with it when he just posted the claim. Boy was he right. The only issue where I think he was incorrect was in relating Latin to German. It has to be related to all the languages. To the way the words sound, more specifically. Essentially it is not even Latin language in the original inscriptions. The Latin came later.

I created a separate thread for the Latin language:
 

codis

Well-known member
Messages
143
Reactions
323
The only issue where I think he was incorrect was in relating Latin to German. It has to be related to all the languages. To the way the words sound, more specifically. Essentially it is not even Latin language in the original inscriptions. The Latin came later.
I agree.
Latin is not a German "dialect", albeit there are strong relations. Like latinisms that doesn't seem to appear in other languages. But the relation to "romanic" languages seeems stronger then to German.
I would guess Latin is an ancient "Esperanto", or like Fomenko suggested, a purely artificial language like the ancient Greek. Klingon, anyone ???
 

PrincepAugus

Well-known member
Messages
443
Reactions
889
I agree.
Latin is not a German "dialect", albeit there are strong relations. Like latinisms that doesn't seem to appear in other languages. But the relation to "romanic" languages seeems stronger then to German.
I would guess Latin is an ancient "Esperanto", or like Fomenko suggested, a purely artificial language like the ancient Greek. Klingon, anyone ???
Oh, I've never thought of Latin as a constructed language for a false history. I would like to see more to this.
 

codis

Well-known member
Messages
143
Reactions
323
Oh, I've never thought of Latin as a constructed language for a false history. I would like to see more to this.
I'm not sure about the history of Latin, but the historical and current fields of application speak for themselves - religion and academics (e.g. medicine, biology). Historically, academics was very tightly interwoven with the church. One might perhaps add judiciary, another field the church had it's dirty fingers in.
The mainstream historical interpretation of Latin is a native language of the core population of an empire, forced upon vassall states. It rests on exactly zero preserved documents, only hearsay and alleged copies.
Alternative scenarios are equally plausible, like "Esperanto" - an agreed-upon artificial language for international communication. Multiple centers of civilisation could have agreed upon it, and developed it over a course of decades, avoiding the need to learn multiple languages to manage their foreign relations.
 

Jim Duyer

Well-known member
Messages
179
Reactions
464
No, I don't see any connections between Latin and Germanic languages. The Scandinavian languages are much, much, older than Latin.
 

Silent Bob

Active member
Messages
27
Reactions
112
Someone has claimed to have deciphered the Voynich Manuscript. Overall I think they are legit for a few reasons. First, they are not establishment, just a father and his sons looking into it out of genuine interest/curiosity. The link to old Turkish languages makes sense and his interest in ancient Turkish languages explains how he has been able to start deciphering it. There are two videos to look at, the initial breakthrough and a follow up Q and A one year later (posted just last week). In the 2nd video he tells us that their paper was rejected for publication (a good sign in my view) and even more telling, he was denied permission to show us the reviews they received which explain why they were rejected.

There seems to be a pattern of old texts being 'indecipherable' by anyone, or only by appointed establishment 'experts' - very convenient! Clearly they don't want us to know what these texts actually say, so this makes sense from a gate-keeping perspective. Good luck to them, hope they manage to complete their translation and look forward to reading it if they do.

 

Jim Duyer

Well-known member
Messages
179
Reactions
464
More than ten years ago I discovered an alphabet hidden inside the Codex Seraphinianus. All I got for my trouble was complete ridicule by everyone, even though none could show any evidence at all that my discovery was in error, or even not in accordance with accepted Linguistics. The only ones who liked it were the Russians! They not only linked my site on a great many websites of their own, but I was interviewed by two different Russian magazines for articles, and congratulated by them. WTF? I was then asked, why I did not decipher the Voynich manuscript. I believe that I could. I also believe that I would not waste my time. I no longer care about publishing anything or begging anyone for publication review rights. I will publish everything from now on in my own self-published books for the public, and to hell with the establishment.
 

Top