Talk:Proto-Canaanite alphabet
From Biocrawler, the free encyclopedia.
THE UGARITIC ABJAD... A ROVÁS ALPHABET
[1] (http://www.michelangelo.cn) The Magyar rovás The Magyar rovás make up an alphabet of 40 letters, plus several ligatures or letters representing consonant clusters or syllables. Some 24 letters are very similar to Vinča signs, to Germanic runes, to letters of the Asiatic runic scripts and of the earliest Italic and Greek alphabets. Some 16 letters appear to be later additions: they are rounded and/or do not comply with the 5 rules of the runic scripts (see page 45 of the book), and/or are not similar to Vinča or European signs. These 16 signs were added to the rovás in Central Asia, when the Magyars were no longer carving hard materials, but drawing on parchment, as the Parthians did. Out of the 24 letters that are similar to Germanic runes, 16 appear to be very similar to the Germanic runes, but some 8, which could correspond to signs added by the Celts to represent their Indo-European phonemes, are not. In particular, the phoneme [th] was written in the North and was kept in Irish; but it was written in the south and, still similar, is kept in Greek. The Germanic runes and the Magyar rovás could both have derived from an earlier 16-letter alphabet. In fact, the initial 16-letter Flavio *VUARK, but also the *Pannonico alphabet, can be reconstructed by comparing the rovás and the runes with some ancient alphabets: Esik, Lemnos, Camuni, Veio, Marsiliana, and Venetic alphabets. The Esik, Lemnos, and Camuni alphabets remain so far undeciphered. The Esik and Lemnos alphabets appear to be congruent with a Finno-Ugric phonology; the Esik alphabet does not contain any of the additional signs added by the Germans and Celts in Europe; the Lemnos alphabet only contains few of them. These three isolated alphabets appear to have kept some of the most ancient VUARK characters. In Esik (nearby "Alma Ata" = "Mother/Father of Apple", Hungarian name of the former capital city of Kazakhstan), in the grave of an Amazon Shaman Princess (J. W. Jay) buried with a rich treasure, an inscription on a silver bowl was found. The grave has been dated back to the 5th century B.C. The characters that make up this inscription consist of: 12 characters identical to 12 Flavio *VUARK characters, two *characters identical to another two of the *VUARK, and a few possible ligatures. This inscription cannot be Phoenician, or Greek because some of its signs have never been written around the Mediterranean Sea, (except along the western shores of the Adriatic Sea, where Pannonico populations are supposed to have migrated from Illyria). Instead, these characters do appear in later alphabets of the Turanian plains, in the Siberian rovás, in the Magyar rovás in the Nu Shü syllabary (Yunnan, China), and in the Kaganga script (Sumatra) (See the book "Honfoglalás... the Magyars are back home" for other cultural markers that link all these regions). The Esik script contains no signs at all that resemble any Indo-European addition: the Hungarian population that arrived in Esik could have been able, while in Europe, to keep itself separated from the Celts. When the Camuni alphabets were carved, the Indo-European phonemes had already been added; but they were different from those used in the Germanic runes and in the Magyar rovás. Furthermore, the Camuni alphabets teach us that the Germanico X and the Pannonico g were alternative characters for the same [a] phoneme. The Veio and Marsiliana alphabets have been found in Etruria: these two alphabets were not (not) Etruscan alphabets: the Etruscans never, or only occasionally, used some 8 letters of these alphabets. These alphabets could be Pannonico alphabets, a few centuries older than their official dating (8th-7th century B.C.): in fact, they are more similar to the alphabet that the Ugaritics could have copied than to the later Phoenician abjad. The Camuni alphabets have characters that do appear in the Ugaritic script, but do not appear in the Phoenician abjad. Thus, it is impossible that the Camuni alphabets could have been copied from the Phoenicians. Instead, it is possible that the Ugaritics could have copied similar alphabets from Europe. The Germanic runes (FuŜark) The Germanic runes consisted of 24 letters. Eight of them are not stable in space and time (the corresponding characters and the associated phonology changed with time, and from one region to another) and/or do not comply with the rules of the runes. The remaining 16 runes, which were stable in time and space, represent the 16 phonemes that are still peculiar to the Finnish alphabet. The phonemes [b], [d], [g], [w], [z], [f], [th], (and probably [o] in ancient times) are not even used these days in Finnish words. These phonemes were added by the Germanics and correspond to the 8 letters that are graphically and phonetically unstable in time and space in the many different runic scripts. When the German populations left Scandinavia, the Vikings started writing again with a 16-letter alphabet, congruent with a limited phonology.
The Flavio VUARK All (all) the earliest European alphabets, including the oldest Athenian and the Etruscan ones, only had the letters needed to represent those Finno-Ugric 16 phonemes. Tocharian, the so-called "Indo-European" language of the Tarim Basin, (possibly an intertwined language Hungarian/Gandhara Sanskrit), also had a limited phonology. Hungarian also, in ancient time, was lacking the [b], [d], [?] phonemes (M. Alinei). The letters for the additional Indo-European phonemes were added later on, when the Indo-Europeans had learnt how to write. Ancient agglutinative languages, including Sumerian according to some scholars, had (and several ones still have) a limited phonology. All the ancient European alphabets therefore derive from an original 16-letter European alphabet. Both the Germanic runes and the Magyar rovás derived from an earlier, pre-Indo-European, 16-letter VUARK alphabet congruent with the ancient Finno-Ugric phonology and were made up with characters identical or similar to Vincha signs. The European scripts later inherited these same VUARK letters, with the same phonetic values. (See table 43 of the book, which shows that all (all) the letters of the VUARK and of the *Pannonico alphabets were later used by the most ancient European alphabets). The Flavio *VUARK could have been brought to the shores of the Baltic Sea by those Hungarian populations that migrated from the Carpathian Basin northwards at the beginning of the 2nd millennium B.C. (See the book "Honfoglalás... the Magyars are back home", page 85). The Flavio *VUARK evolved in two different scripts: Pannonico *VUARK (from which the Magyar rovás derived) and Finnic *VUARK (from which the Germanic runes derived). There are only a few letters which make the difference between these two *VUARKs. Astonishingly the Magyar rovás, the mother of all alphabets, kept both variations (and also the variations which shall appear in Southern Europe): d and X; Q and n; s, Y, and t; K and p; I and c, W and q; g, and a. Up until the 18th century A.D.. All the ancient alphabets quoted in the book had a feature in common: none of them was ever designed with any horizontal stroke. Such a strict rule could only be a religious dictate. In any case, a "reconstruction", be it linguistic or historical, is pure speculation as long as a proof of its existence, at the supposed time, is not found.
The Ugaritic abjad The Ugaritic abjad (abjad = consonant alphabet, without vowels) is written in cuneiform. Cuneiform was not in the tradition of the region. The local writing tradition is that of Byblos, which, nevertheless, appears to have already borrowed several rovás and/or Vincha signs in the 19th century B.C.. The Ugaritic abjad is written from left to right in a region that always, and until these days, writes right to left. In Beth Shemesh (Israel), the Ugaritic script also was used, but it had been modified to become a right to left script, modified to fit the local tradition. The Ugaritic abjad contains letters for vowels: the Semites did not use the vowels of the Ugaritic script and still these days do not use vowels in their scripts. The Ugaritic signs that corresponded to vowels in Europe were used by the Semites as semivowels or laryngeals; the letters for [i] and [u] were not even ever transliterated. No Northern Semitic script has ever transliterated eight letters of the Ugaritic script: they were alien phonemes, vowels, or ideograms. Who would design an alphabet including letters that would never be used? The letter order of the Ugaritic abjad is not the traditional Semitic letter order - h, l, h, m... The Beth Shemesh alphabet was also modified in order to have a Semitic letter order. The Ugaritic abjad was alien to the region in which it was written: this is why it had a short life: 2 centuries. The Ugaritic abjad cannot have been designed in Phoenicia. The Ugaritic abjad was an attempt at writing the *Pannonico alphabet by using the cuneiform writing technique borrowed from the Acadians. It could have even been originally a secret script to be used between Pannonico traders and a friendly Levantine population (or a Pannonico "Middle East settlement"): in fact, the Pannonici would have easily understood it and the Levantines would have used their clay tablets and their writing techniques. The encryption key was very efficient: nobody has found it during 3,300 years! It is not me the monster, but those who looked at the Ugarit tablet with little attention because it could not serve their causes. If you attentively look at it, you easily see how similar it was to the European scripts! The Phoenicians, in the 11th century B.C., converted again the cuneiform script into linear, using the reverse rules that had been used to transcribe the *Pannonico alphabet into Ugaritic: in fact, they left in the Phoenician alphabet the same scribal mistake that appears in the Ugaritic abjad: the B has only one hump. Such a B, with a single hump, was never copied by any ancient European script. Nor the head of the ox (aleph) was ever copied by the Europeans (except in Athens. See page 59 of the book for its origin). Nor the C... Et cetera. The Greeks did not copy the Phoenician alphabet. The Athenians, and the Lemnos peoples used a 16-letter alphabet as long as they were able to speak and write their own language, until the beginning of the first millennium B.C.: only at that time the letters needed to represent Indo-European phonemes started appearing in Greece. The Etruscans never added the Indo-European phonemes to their alphabet: some exceptions were graphically and phonetically unstable in time and space, and in most cases different from the Phoenician letters, and in some cases different from any other known script (e.g.: 8 for [f]). The Greeks did not need to invent the vowels. In fact, the vowels existed already in the *Pannonico alphabet: so much so that the Ugaritics did copy the vowels from the *Pannonico. The Semites used some of them as semivowels or laryngeals. They never transliterated the signs for [i] and [u]. The Europeans did not copy their alphabets from the Phoenicians, but the Phoenicians, the Greeks, and the Etruscans copied the *Pannonico alphabet. The reconstructed *Pannonico alphabet did exist: in fact, the Ugaritics copied it in the 14th century B.C.. The table compiled by Vasil Ilyov (who hypothesises a derivation of the Cyrillic alphabet from the Vincha signs, and who is correct, through the Ugaritic) proves that in Macedonia (region of the Vincha Culture), between 1650 and 1200 B.C ( the time in which the *Pannonico was brought to Ugarit), all the characters of the *Pannonico alphabet were included in the local inscriptions.
Consequences Gimbutenie was right: the Vincha signs were, or generated, the "Old European" script. From the Vincha signs derived the Flavio *VUARK, which was the Mother of all other alphabets. Most of the most ancient letters of the *VUARK survived in the Magyar rovás until the 19th century A.D., and still survive, these days, in the Roman alphabet that we all use, every day. The Hungarians were in Europe in the 14th century B.C.. (See also "Honfoglalás... the Magyars are back home"). They brought the 16-letter Flavio *VUARK alphabet to Northern Europe, where it evolved as Germanic runes. They also brought the *Pannonico alphabet to Central Asia, where it evolved as Magyar rovás. The Europeans that had an alphabet, before the Indo-Europeans had learnt how to write, spoke agglutinative languages with a limited phonology. Gimbutenie correctly described the "Old European" society: matriarchal, egalitarian, peace loving... She only made a mistake: those populations were not nomadic, war faring, pastoralist Indo-Europeans; they were sedentary, democratic, peace loving Hungarians. The Hungarians are the most ancient population that shows up, with an alphabet, and maybe with a script (the Tatarlaka tablet), in the History of Humanity.
(The only other origin being hypothesised in order to unveil the "mystery" of the Ugaritic script is that of a derivation from the Levantine Bronze Age scripts (proto-Canaanite and proto-Synaitic). This hypothesis is maintained by Jewish, Christian, and Lebanese (Islamic) scholars attempting to prove the historicity of the Bible by means of the Ugaritic literature, in view of a possible final theory by which the Bible was not an oral heritage, but it was written in Proto-Canaanite.
The clues which would support this theory are: the proto-Canaanite/Synaitic signs (were used in the same region in which the Ugaritic script was written; the Ugaritic script was also used for writing the Canaanite language; the names of the Phoenician letters were copied by the Greeks (this may be true, but does not prove that the Ugaritic and/or the Phoenician scripts derived from the proto-Canaanite/Synaitic signs).
Out of the many Bronze Age signs found, only a few are vaguely similar to some Phoenician letters (see pages 135-137 of the book); but those Ministers of faiths do not explain how the proto-Canaanite/Synaitic signs would have evolved into the Ugaritic script and later on into the Phoenician script: maybe they pretend this should be another act of faith.
The Levantine scripts were always pictographic. The European scripts were symbolic thousands of years before any pictographic script appeared. Writing is the symbolic (and only the symbolic) representation of speech. BS).
Michelangelo.cn
