The Scythian Phoenix This is a simple, printer-friendly version of the page.
Click here to go back to the original page.
Mihaly Mellar :
Reading of Linear A Writings


The readings of the texts of the Linear A corpus presented below is based on GORILA = Louis Godart and Jean-Pierre Olivier, Re



This introduction to Linear A (LinA) writing is uncommon in all aspects, exactly that makes this new approach to decipherment work. No free rein to esoteric interpretation of symbols, no translation from an exotic language only the decipherer speaks, the whole corpus can be read through with just a handful of simple reading rules – in today’s Magyar. I know how ridiculously this sounds, but let me explain: Magyar is an agglutinative, root-based language, in which hundreds or even thousands of words are derived from the same root-word. If one changes a consonant in the consonantal frame of the root-word, one has to make that same change simultaneously in the whole word-family based on that root-word, or the word-family splits up. As it is impossible to change simultaneously thousands of words, a language is either agglutinative, based on never changing root-words or else. Minoan belonged to this never changing root-based agglutinative languages and lived on in Carian, Lydian, Lucian, Thracian, … to Hungarian languages, which should be called by a common name as Scythian. The writing system changed from hieroglyphic, through linear, rovás (runic), alphabetic to the Latin set of characters, and the method changed from rebus and acrophonic based consonantal to mixed, defective notation of vowels to full sound notation of today, but the language only had grown a couple of new buds on the same old stock.

For over 60 years the belief rules supreme that LinA is a syllabary writing system, because Linear B, which adopted and adapted quite a number of Minoan hieroglyphs and linear signs is a syllabic writing (if to believe the phone-book-like  decipherment of it). By the same logic, what you read in this moment is a syllabary as well, because Cherokee syllabary adopted and adapted some of the ABC‘s letters to denote their syllables.

We can easily demonstrate that LinA (similarly to Minoan hieroglyphic writing) is a phonetic writing system, based on rebus and acrophonic principles in letters, and using defective notation of vowels as the method of writing.

The researchers agree that most of the tablets LinA survived on are Balance Ledgers employing logograms and ideograms for commodities, and natural numbers and fractions for enumerating them. A commonly used “logogram” is  GRA, short for grain, not for the word, but for the commodity itself, the experts are saying. By looking up some of the tablets with this sign on, one would realise that the sign depicts a simply drawn RoSe (RóZSa, in Minoan/Magyar) with its stem and petals, and a horizontal line cutting of the last sound (a returning technique in LinA): RóZSa > RoZS, is the Minoan/Magyar word for rye, indeed a grain.

Now, isn’t it highly illogical and ridiculous that the commodity’s name represented by the “logogram/ideogram” is derived from a depicted object’s name – but not the commodity in question – by the rebus principle?! And GRA is not the exception, but the rule: all LinA signs are consonantal (one-, two-, three-, and more-letter) word-frames of the given pictogram's name, say,  TE stands for T_L as the consonantal frame of the word ToLL (feather) depicted with the simplest possible drawing.

The numbers are no exception. As a matter of fact, the numerals are the more easily and unmistakably recognised objects, so it would be foolish waste of resources not to use their phonetic values the same way as of any other sign. (If in doubt, LinA uses the • for T_S/Z (TíZ), and - for the natural number 10.) The same goes for fractions as well, actually there are no fractions in the LinA corpus at all, but the half!

The weighing of the (ideo~/logo~)grams

The introduction to the method and examples of readings from the Linear A corpus presented below is based on GORILA = Louis Godart and Jean-Pierre Olivier, Recueil des inscriptions en Linéaire A. Études Crétoises 21, vols. 1-5. (Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1976-1985, available at and on John G.  Younger’s website available at .

Professor John G. Younger (JGY for short) transcribed the Linear A texts into a tabular form, most suited to the unsubstantiated preconception by which the texts are simple lists of commodities, names and transaction terms, although not one of the texts on the tablets even remotely resembles a tabular shape or form with rows and columns as one would expected. From where than this conviction comes from? “Almost all documents consist of lists, with headings, of one or two word entries, each followed by a logogram followed by a number and/or fraction.” But than the texts are almost, or at least partially deciphered by this statement, contrary to what JGY declares in red font colour, namely that “My own aim in producing these webfiles has NOT been to decipher Linear A.

Unfortunately, JGY has another fatal misconception, this one is concerning the Linear A writing itself. He argues, that “Decipherments based on reading the signs as pictograms, then identifying what the object was called in a language, and then identifying the phonetic value of the sign as the initial sound or first phoneme of the object's name (the acrophonic principle) -- this process does not seem to work for Linear A for two major reasons.

Let us analyse first his second reason: “2, it can be demonstrated that, for several Hieroglyphic & Linear A signs, the acrophonic principle probably did not operate. Hieroglyphic *012 , a bull-head, becomes Linear AB 23 MU, Hieroglyphic *018 , a dog head, becomes AB 60 RA, and Hieroglyphic *060 , a cat face, becomes AB 80 MA. My guess is that the phonetic value of these signs reflect the sound the animal makes, "moo," "arf," and "miaow" (in English).

Actually, the hieroglyphic sign *012  Marha-fej (bull-head), *018  Kutya-fej (dog-head)  and *060  Macska-fej (cat-head) are pictograms of animal heads and they represents the sounds M, K and M, as these are the sound-heads (capital sounds or capital letters) in the names of the depicted animals.

AB 23  MU has no relation whatsoever to *012  M, it is the linear drawing of a swinging (LeNDüLő) arm/lever on top of a post and it represents the four-letter L_N_D_L.

AB 60  RA is simply this:  an arrow/lasso pointing to a corner (SaRoK), and it represents the three-letter S/Z_R_K (short for S_R_K/SZ_R_K/Z_R_K).

AB 80  MA is really the linear drawing of a cat-head, and stands for the sound M as head-sound of the word Macska-fej (cat-head).

Still in point 2, JGY writes that “And there are other examples where the sound of the object seemingly relates to its phonetic value (e.g., Hiero *057 , a key sistrum, becomes AB 67 KI [the clinking sound of a metal rattle]).” But, dear professor, Key (Kulcs) and Clinking (Koc/Koccintás) are proper words, even though of onomatopoeic origin, so the acrophonic process applies to them the same. They both stands for the sound K in Hieroglyphic and Linear A writings correspondingly.

And now, let us see objection number 1. to the acrophonic process: “1, the identifying term for the "pictogram" cannot be proved in advance of deciphering the script.” This is true, these two processes must work in tandem, agreeing and enforcing each other. 

My interest in Linear A started with the HT 31 tablet picturing some vessels with notes attached to the vessels. I had realised that some of those notes make sense in my native language when reading the letters by their pictorial values. As the word “linear” suggests: these letters are produced with narrow and uniform breath lines, never the less, they are still small pictures called hieroglyphs or pictograms. The readings on the vessels are intrinsic descriptions of the vessels depicted. But which one has came first? Does it really matter? The identification and the reading of it has arrived at the same time.

Ask yourself what vessels are used for? To keep liquids in them, drinks in the first place: in Old Magyar drink is it (nowadays ital). If to believe JGY and all, the transcription starts with I-TI, which is a good start for an IT/ITal (drink), but let us take literally the name of Linear A (nomen est omen!) and see what the particular linear drawing represents. (To the right is Yves Duhoux facsimile drawing, which is in some details more precise than GORILA’s from above.)


1. line: .

The first sign  is [I], hard to recognise, but let us believe the experts, stands for I.

The second sign  TI is the drawing of a roof-frame (TeTőZeT), and it represents the consonantal frame of this word, namely the four-letter T_T_S/Z_T.

The third sign  SA is showing branching out arms (SZét~), from the SZe root-word (se/seu in Latin), and stands for S (like sh in ship), SZ (s in see), Z or ZS (s in usual), in short: S/Z.

The forth sign is a dot (•), which stands for ten (TíZ), and like any other pictogram, represents a letter, that is a two-letter: T_S/Z.

The fifth sign  PU is a drawing of a man stumbling to his all four (BoTLó), putting forward his hands to cushion the fall, so it stands for the three-letter: B_T_L.

The sixth sign  KO is a navel (Kő’DöK), a three-letter: K_D_K.

Lot of the experts agree that Minoan language is related to Luwian/Luvian, with its daughter-languages like Carian, Lucian, Lydian, Lemnian, Thracian, which all are using alphabet-writings, but with defective notation of vowels, as Ignacio J. Adiego demonstrated in his book: The Carian Language. All these languages are actually one an the same language, using different set of characters, but the same method of defective notation of vowels. These sets have letters for vowels as well, but use them only when the word starts with one, or to state the reading precisely when it is otherwise doubtful. By presuming that this common method has its root in Luwian, and further back in Minoan, I made an attempt to read the text transliterated so far:

I-TI-SA > IT_T_S/Z_T _S/Z > ITaT aSZóT éS > itat aszót ésit gives drink to the drying out (or withered) and’;

10-PU-KO > T_S/Z B_T_L K_D_K > TűZBe iTTaL Kű’DiK > tűzbe ittal kű’dikthey send it with liquid into fire’ - to extinguish it, of course!

Together: itat aszót és tűzbe ittal kű’dik (it gives drink to the drying out and they sand it with liquid into fire). The whole text, and the whole Linear A corpus reads like this, no translation, no interpretation, just simple and direct reading. All the words are contextual and they are built into expressions and sentences that make perfect sense.

We have stopped at the seventh sign, which is again a dot (• = 10): T_S/Z.

The eight sign  is a cauldron (üST > _S/ZT) with three letters on top of it: the first sign is II (misinterpreted as a handle, but look at Duhoux drawing!), it is the sign for 2 (KéT/KeTTő > K_T). The second sign is unreadable, but the context suggests that it is the drawing of a sheaf/bundle , that is the KE (KéVe > K_V) sign. And the third sign  RI is visible again, also misinterpreted for a handle, but it is the drawing of a kneecap (TéRDéK > T_R_D_K).

Now, let us put these signs together:

10-{2+[KE]-RI+*410VAS} > T_S/Z K_T K_V T_R_D_K _S/ZT > uTaSoK éTKéVe’ TöRőDő KoSZT > utasok étkéve’ törődő, koszt … (for the nourishment of travellers concerned, meal …).

From this text we can conclude that the tripod cauldron pictured on the tablet must be of copper or bronze and be suitable for cooking meals for those travellers mentioned, but the “logogram” for representing the cauldron is not in the reading anywhere, because it is just a simple (two-)letter sign as any other. The number signs, the 10-s and the 2, are also, in this case and in many others, just the same as any other letter: they make up consonantal frames, which have to be filled in with vowels for a meaningful, contextual expression. Actually, there are two kinds of depictions for 10-s on this tablet: dot (•) and dash (­­-), here the first stands for the two-letter T_S/Z, the second for the natural number 10.

I know, it is very frustrating that the comparison of sign-groups, with these rules of reading, has no use, as the reading of the consonantal frames depends on the context and its interpretation is impossible without knowing the language. Trails like Duhoux’s: “it is likely that SU-PU and SU-PA3-RA are related: SU-P/SU-P3 with A-RA perhaps an ending (diminutive?)” is hopeless: SU-PU > SZéP, BoTLó > szép, botló (nice, stumbling (due to the pointed bottom!?); SU-PA3-RA > SZePe-FaLaZaTú SZüRKe > szepe-falazatú, szürke (spotty-walled, gray). Even the same sign SU first reads SZéP (nice), while in the second sign-group it reads as SZePe (spotty).

In the comparative linguistics method, applied by the researchers to decipher Linear A, it is all the same how the sign DA, DE, DI, and so on sounds, because the linguists are only comparing sign-groups to each other, not real, live, sense bearing words spoken by real men and understood by other flesh and blood men.


2. line .

We cannot see what number 5 (III+II) is referring to, so we have to ignore it here.

The second sign is a cup with two letters attached to it, like two knots of hair. And really, the first sign,  QA is the drawing of a KNoT (KoNTY) of hair with a hairpin stuck into it, so it stands for the three-letter K_N_T/Y. The second sign  PA3 is the drawing of a wall and/or floor frame with wall cladding and/or floor boards (FaLaZaT/PaLLóZaT) and stands for the four-letter F/P_L_Z_T.

The third sign, the -, stands for the natural number 10.

Now we have a description:

K_N_T/Y F/P_L_Z_T > KoNTY-FüLeZeTT > konty-fülezett ((a vessel) with knot of hair-like handle, literally: with knot of hair-like ear).

As the tablets have a very limited surface to write on, using words with double use and/or meaning would be an advantage: K_N_T/Y can be read as KaNTa (basin/jug), giving the proper name for the vessel in question. Then the reading would be:

QA-PA3+*402VASa(=QA) : KoNTY-FüLeZeTT KaNTa/KaNCSó : a basin/jug (cantharus, in Latin) with knot of hair-like handle (ear).

The text implies that the vessel has a handle in the place where QA is and a mouth where the pipe like PA3 is.

The following sign is again a vessel with two letters added. The first one is the sketch of  a room with a hall in front of it:  SU, stands for the two-letter S/Z_B (SZoBa). The second letter PU, as we have already found out stands for the three-letter B_T_L. Together the two letters read as

S/Z_B B_T_L > SZéP BoTLó > szép, botló (nice stumbling).

And again as above the name of the vessel is given in the above script: S/Z_B > SZaPu > szapu (sapu (similarly to bushel, it is a measuring vessel for grain, known as Pozsonyi szapu)). So the whole ligature reads as:

SU-PU+*415VAS(=SU) : SZéP BoTLó SZaPu : nice stumbling szapu.

The last sign in this row is again the natural number 10. Must be the number of the vessels concerned.

Here we have the mixing of related labial sounds F and P represented, interestingly enough, with a linear drawing that can be seen both as falazat (walling) and pallózat (flooring). (By the way: the words wall and fal are of the same root.) Because these sounds can easily change over even from dialect to dialect in the same language, it has no real bearing on the reading of Linear A how it was pronounced then, we only know today’s pronunciation of that sound in the word it is represented. The same could be said about the s, sz, z, zs hissing sounds which not even today are differentiated, say, in English spelling, see for example: sell, access, accession, measure, is.


3. line .

The first sign is a vessel with side handles and three letters on top of it in all transcriptions. But if we have a close look at the photograph and Duhoux facsimile drawing: , after the first sign, that of a cart-wheel with spokes (KüLLő), which stands for K_L, we will notice a dot (T_S/Z). The third sign is the rowing sign  RO, standing for R. The fourth is PA3 (F/P_L_Z_T) and the four together:

K_L T_S/Z R F/P_L_Z_T > KeLLeTőSRe FüLeZeTT > kelletősre fülezett (equipped with handles for more pleasing).

Following the emerging pattern, we will find the name of the vessel in the added text: KA+10 > K_L+T_S/Z > KuLaTS > kulacs (pitcher/jug (coleus, in Latin)). This ligature than reads as:

KA+10-RO-PA3+*416VAS(=KA+10) : KeLLeTőSRe FüLeZeTT KuLaCS : pitcher/jug equipped with handles for more pleasing.

The three free-standing letters are  SA (S/Z);  JA (J/L/Y) for Jászol/Járom/Lóiga (manger/Yoke);  MA (M) and the word is SuLYoM > sulyom, a pointed object, like the vessel pictured.


4. line .

The first letter is  KI (K), we have already touched above; the second sign  DE is a ceremonial headdress (DíSZ(süveg)), stands for D_S/Z; the third is  MA (M); the fourth is  *323 the drawing of haycock (RaKaT). One can see these haycocks enveloped around a post even today in the Alps. The sign stands for the three-letter R_K_T; and the last sign shows growth NA (NőL/NYőL) to a top line or a handle (NYéL) for a hammer, say; so it stands for the two-letter N/Y_L. The ’five-letter’ word is than:

K D_S/Z M R_K_T N/Y_L > Kú’DúS-MeRő KúTNáL > kú’dús-merő kútnál (dipping (vessel) for beggars/wanderers at wells).


5. line .

The first sign, followed by the number 400, is just the bottom part of a vessel. The following vessel has three signs attached, all mentioned earlier:  SU (S/Z_B);  PA3 (F/P_L_Z_T); and  RA (S/Z_R_K). And the reading is:

S/Z_B F/P_L_Z_T S/Z_R_K > SZePe-FaLaZaTú SZüRKe  > szepe-falazatú, szürke (spotty walled, grey).

Instead of the falazatú (walled), we could read fülezett (with handle), but grey colour is more suited for the description of a cup than only to its handle. This is the contextual rule applied. Again, the name of the vessel is in text:  SU (S/Z_B) now reads SáP or SáF(ó), that is: butt/pail (σκαφη, scaphium). So, this ligature (letters+vessel) reads as:

SU-PA3-RA+*402VASb(=SU) : SZePe-FaLaZaTú SZüRKe SáP/SáF(ó) : spotty walled, grey butt/pail.


6. line .

3000 pcs of the vessels with three letters attached. The first letter PA , is tree (Fa) and stands for labials F/V/B/P. The second sign is TA , which is the sketch of a case or box (TéKa/ToK) and stands for the two-letter: T_K. The third sign QE  is a drawing of the moving part of a churn, the disc with holes in it and handle (KöPüLőFa), stands for the four-letter K_P_L_F. And now again we can add the name of the vessel, it is in the first two letters PA-TA > F_T_K > FiTYóK, which stands for both the name and the size of vessel: quarter an icce/itce, roughly third of a pint. So, the last ligature reads as:

PA-TA-QE+*402VASc(=PA-TA) : BáToK (bádog) KöPöLY, FiTYóK (negyed iccés) : tin-ware cup (for cupping/blood-letting), fityók (something like: a third of a pint-size cup, 0.22 liter).

Here we have a descriptive name of the vessel first, followed in the second read with a measure of it.

So, the whole tablet reads like this:

- It gives drink to the drying out and they send it with liquid into fire,

      for the nourishment of travellers concerned, meal […(cooks in it)…]                 5

- a basin/jug (cantharus, in Latin) with knot of hair-like handle (ear)                       10

- nice, stumbling szapu (measuring vessel)                                                                10

- [ ] pitcher/jug (coleus, in Latin) equipped with handles for more pleasing             10

- pointed                                                                                                                      30

- [ ]                                                                                                                              10

- dipping (vessel) for beggars/wanderers at wells                                                       –

- [ ] (basin/jug)                                                                                                          400

- spotty walled, grey butt/pail (scaphium)                                                                300

- tin-ware cup (for cupping/bloodletting), fityók (a third of a pint-size cup)         3000


The numbers on the tablet are too rounded up for an inventory. It is rather a shopping list for a big institution or, more likely, a government. Than again, the header is a bit unusual (today) for a shopping list.

This tablet is one of the few resembling a balance ledger, but as you can see the column for logograms is not exactly what its naming would suggest.

The researchers are convinced that “Almost all documents consist of lists, with headings, of one or two word entries, each followed by a logogram followed by a number and/or fraction.” To prove this conviction JGY brings up two examples: HT 28 and HT 114. It would take up to much space to take apart HT 28, but we will see on the other one,


what Balance Ledgers really are.

 (Most of the Linear A texts are represented on JGY website in tabular forms, so, I had no other choice but to leave it that way, only adding an extra (green) column in the middle and indicating where the reading comes from with its placement.)


HT 114 (Pigorini 83735) (GORILA I: 186-187) HT Scribe 4



olvasat                        logogram         number





Ki TöRőDiK CSóKo-





-S RáVeSZi                 RoSSZa-         -T SZ-





                                    -ÜL-                -HeT





                                    FoG-                -aGGYa





                                    SZüLő             eGY-





                                    -BŰ’                Ha Rí Ma















                                    SZeSZéLY      KüLöNC









The pictograms, turning up first time on this tablet, are:

TA2  C/S_K < CSíK-szedő (strainer)

RA2   R_V_S/Z < RoVáS (notch/score)

GRA  R_Z/S < RoZS (rye), the drawing is a RóZSa (RoSe), the last sound is cut off

OLE  OL_ < OLi/OLaj (oil), pictures the ÖL (lap of a man)

7 HéT HéT (seven)

FIC  F_G < FüGe (fig), the drawing represents a pair of shining earrings (FüGGő)!

1 _GY eGY (one)

VINa  S/Z_L < SZőLő (grape) represented by the drawing of a vine arbor

BOSm  BU, it is a ligature {PA+U}, it can be BŰ/BŐ-lény (bison)

3 H_R_M HáRoM (three)

9 K_L_N_C KiLeNC (nine)


KI-RI-TA2 & SA-RA2 > K T_R_D_K CS_K S/Z R_V_S/Z : Ki TöRőDiK CSóKoS RáVeSZi : who cares kisser persuades

GRA-10-OLE-7 > R_Z/S T_S/Z ÖL HeT : RoSSZaT SZÜLHeT : bad (accus.) can give birth

FIC-1 > F_G _GY : FoGaGGYa (fogadja) : s/he comforts it

VINa > SZ_L : SZüLő :  parent

1- BOSm > _GY BU : eGYBŰ’ : at once

3 > H_R_M : Ha Rí Ma : if s/he/it cries today

SA VINa S/Z S/Z_L : SZeSZéLY : caprice

9 > K_L_NC: KüLöNC : queer


Ki törődik (azt) csókos ráveszi, rosszat szülhet: fogadja szülő egyből ha rí ma.

Szeszély különc.

Kisser will persuade the caring one, it can give birth to (can cause) bad things: today the parent comforts it (the child) at once when it cries.

Caprice is queer.


The Balance Ledger has disappeared, the numbers are just like any other pictogram. If you look again at the “logograms” you have to realise that they do not picture the commodities they suppose to represent, but something else with a similar or rimming (rhyming) name. So, in LinA writing system the primary importance is not on what is pictured, but on how it sounds what is on the picture. In other words, this is a strictly phonetic writing in which the letters are consonantal (one-, two-, three-, and more-letter) frames of words naming the pictograms. There are no logograms or ideograms in Linear A writing, just letter signs representing the sounds of speech.

At a closer look at one of the so called logograms or ideograms, one is confronted with a contradiction. The picture used for the representation of, say, rye (RoZS) turns up to be that of a similarly sounding rose (RóZSa). The commodities’ ideogram is not just an ad hoc symbol, but the pictogram of an easily recognisable and as easily named object, a rose which name rhymes with the name of the commodity in question. That is, the writing system uses the acrophonic or rebus principle for the representation of the said commodity, contrary to the “idea” of  the ideogram, which by definition should “in a system of writing represent a thing or idea but not a particular word or phrase for it.[1]” (Mariam-Webster Dictionary)

And GRA is not an exception but rather the rule in linear A writing system.  FIC (FüGe) is represented with a pair of sparkling earrings (FüGGő). Actually this same drawing can be taken for a pair of gazing, gleaming eyes with excited exclamation: look! (Ni!, Nézd!), which is NI (N). Again, there is no resemblance on the fruit as fig nor as nikuleon, when it is named in “(Minoan?)”: “NI may be the acrophonic symbol for "nikuleon," an old word (Minoan?) attested by Hesychius for "figs" (Neumann 1962)

Of course, there going to be some obstinate people arguing that the picture is not that of a rose (RóZSa) or earrings (FüGGő) but something else. However, the question is not about what are in their or mine opinion represented by these pictograms, but who can back up one’s own argument with a battery of statistics. In the case of the rose I can support my claim with 47, and for the earrings with 30 intelligible, contextually perfectly fitting sentences. What about you?

JGY uses the statement, that “the identifying term for the "pictogram" cannot be proved in advance of deciphering the script” as sledgehammer on any attempt to treat the signs as pictograms. Is it really that strong a statement? Let us see in detail the following script:


KN Zg 55 (HM 621; CMS II 2, no. 213, steatite disk (chance find): MM III/LM I context

a: boar head & knife,


JGY: JA-SA-JA palindromic abbreviation for JA-SA-SA-RA. (?!)


The steatite disk is deciphered, or could be easily deciphered with a more precise naming of it: it is actually discus! For the incredulous, its name is confirmed with the hieros as well:

     boar head & knife > DE-*312 > D_S/Z-K_S/Z > DiSZKoSZ > DiSCuS.

The discus was deciphered, recognised/named first, than came the realisation that its name is given by the hieros: so, the script proves the pictograms. Now, what is the most typical, the more expected feature of a discus? Of course it should be a good flyer, even to fly away like a bird. And what a surprise! the reading is exactly that:

JA-SA-JA : Jó SZáLL / eLSZáLL : good flyer / (it) flies away

This is a reading, the palindromic assumption is only a sumptuous sump.

I thought I finished here with this short script, but it went on bothering me: why the reading of the hieros sounds so “Greek”, why two and why particularly these hieros are used to denote the objects name? As usual, the answer is in the aptly put question: because discus is a compound, two part word! The sign for the second part is KéS,  *312 in LinA (K_S/Z), an unambiguously recognisable dagger or  knife. In Magyar it is a derived word: its root is éK (wedge) and the affix is the already mentioned eS/éS (and) conjunctive word. So, the word KéS (knife) is the shortened form of éKeS (wedged), the descriptive word which literally stands for wedge and [handle]. The conjunction term has been added, glued to the word-root (this is the essence of agglutination) resulting the derived attribute éKeS (wedged), which than took over the role of the whole expression in its shorten form as KéS (knife).

éKeS also means decorated/ornamented, and here is an interesting twist to the whole: another word for decoration in Magyar is DíSZ. But no, this is not the first syllable of the compound word DiSZKoSZ (discus). The first of the compound words in discus comes from the noun GYűSZű, in Szekler DéSZű (thimble), which in the complex becomes an attribute telling about the encircling the wedge makes by encompassing the object, making it into the familiar disc shape: a wedge all around. Either the Szekler DéSZű, or for the foreigners unpronounceable GY in GYűSZű turning into di (like gyémánt-diamond, gyakonus- diaconus, …), the word DéSZű/GYűSZű becomes DiS in Greek. Put together, the compound word (GYűSZű/DéSZű+éKeS) describes the discus very accurately as a round object wedged all around.

And now back to that twist: the boar head, the first hiero stands for the word DiSZ, which is the head-syllable of the word DiSZ-No (boar). If you look up some of the DE signs: , , , , … you will see that they are actually the linear drawings of the boar head with the tasks/fangs at the top and a pair of strings hanging from the bottom. Those strings were used to tie the ornate boar head headdress (DíSZ-süveg) under one’s chin. (I agree, there is no accounting for tastes!)

I hope, this little incursion was a very salutary lesson about the inner workings of an agglutinative language and its organic relationship to hieroglyphic writings. You can play around with scientific terms, but sooner or later you have to realize that people in the process of discovering writing were using only their common senses on their inherited faculties: the capability to recognize and name objects drawn to a two-dimensional surface and to recognize or find rhyming words to those named objects, because this is (or was) writing and reading in essence.


The outwardly numbers and fractions

Another hard basket, I know, is to treat numbers as pictograms, therefore we should prove this assumption. Nothing is more suited to do this task than the number 7 (HéT) on the HT 114 tablet analysed earlier.

Vowel harmony is peculiar to the Magyar language: the words are either front or back words. As Hungarian has plenty of suffixes that come in groups of two, so which one to use depends on whether the word is a back word (consisting of back vowels) or a front word (consisting of front vowels). Such word endings are ~ban/~ben (in), ~nak/~nek (for/to), and such are the verb modifying suffixes ~hat/~het (can: how can you tell? hogy mondhat olyat? you cannot do this! nem tehet ilyet!). These verb-endings sounds like the natural numbers 6 (hat) and 7 (hét).

Back Vowels

a á o ó u ú

Front Vowels

e é i í ö ő ü ű

In the Linear A corpus number 6 has turned up 14 times, always after back words, and 7 has turned up 13 times, always after front words, not one exception to this regularity. (On top of that, “number” 6 appears 5 more times in the spot where the verb hat (act/effect) is due in the sentence, and twice where hat-ol (penetrates) completes the sentence.) Hard to believe that back words can come only in 6-packs, and front words only in 7-packs(!), but this strange behaviour becomes entirely natural when we assume that 6 (hat) = ~hat and 7 (hét) = ~het. Our assumption  is extensively verified by the contextually perfectly fitted verbs formed with the ~hat/~het suffix pair: FIC-6: FoGHaTó (can be compared to); A-6 : Á’HaT (can stand); ... *304-7 : ÉGHeT (can burn); NI-7 : NőHeT (can grow); ... I’m sorry to tell you, but the „4 sale” sign is not a new idea!


The story about fractions is very similar to the above:

Fraction  Jfrac is a good guess, but not a full score, because it is not ½, but it is half (FéL), so it stands for F/V_L, and it pictures a trough (VáLYú). As such it can stand for half (FéL), as prefix, mainly: verb+up (FeL~), as the suffix: with (~VaL/~VeL), and as words like with him/her (VeLe), with this/that (eVVeL/aVVaL), party (FéL), FeeLs FieR (L>R) (FéL)[2], up (FeL), kind of (FéLe), towards (FeLé), shoulder (VáLL), and so on ...

Fraction  Efrac is picturing a sickle (Sarló) and stands mostly for the conjunction and (S/éS/iS) and as noun formative ~_S/~_SZ.

 Ffrac = {RO+Efrac}= R_S/Z and  Hfrac = {SA+Efrac}=S/Z_S/Z (SA is upside down).

 Dfrac is an S-hook used to hang the trays on the scale, TaLeNt (TaLoN): T_L_N.

 Kfrac stands for on (~_N) as it pictures a dash on a post.

  Lfrac pictures a sporran on its tie or belt (TüSZő-KöTő) and stands for the four-letter T_S/Z_K_T.

Afrac and Bfrac are not fractions at all, they are the letters PA and RO.

This is a hard basket, so let us take an example:


MA 4, "lame"/horizontal tablet (HM 1377) (GORILA I: 272-273) (Hallager & Weingarten 1993: 9, found in the Hieroglyphic Deposit) (Hallager 1988 fig. 7) (Palace room III 8, MM III context)








    TőKe PRéMáRuRa      uTaZNa áT

TA *180B




    PRéMáRuT SoK uTa- -ZáS HoZ





    PRéMáRuS uTaZóKaT 

                                         TáVoN HíR Mi

*180+SA+L {*601}





    BáR MeRéSZ aRRa

                                         HúZHaT iNGYé

*180+SA+B {*600}












A[Ki RáSZáLL eGYRe] Jó


                 SZáZ áLHíR MeNNYi CéHeT






100 aLá 37



        SáPó’-                      -HaTVáN


[[160]] 60

A brief glance at the “numbers” could prove that they are not numbers but phonetic signs.

b.1 could be A-[RE-VINa]-1-RO, the sign for RO is under the 1 sign, pictorially suggesting the reading of the word they represent.


 *180 is the drawing of a raw fur (PRéM), to be more precise: of a fur commodity (PRéMáRu). The text will confirm that the commodity is really fur, and as such the attached “fractions” are meaningless, but as phonetic signs of suffixes and/or words, they help us understand the text.

To write “number” 30 as 2x10+10x1 is ridiculous, and to write10 as 6+4 is also very odd, but when we read it as the series of 20 (HúSZ), 6 (HaT), 4 (NéGY), the rhyming words embed into a perfect sentence. To write hundred and thirty-seven the way it is written has a purpose: it is not 137, but 100 and underneath 37 (SZáZ aLá HaRMiNCHéT). This is a typical pictorial writing method, no wonder the tablet comes from a Hieroglyphic Deposit. The last “100” is just a primitive perspective drawing of a cup.


TA > T_K : TőKe : capital

*180B = {*180+RO} > P_R_M_R+R : PRéMáRu uRa : owner of fur goods

15 (TiZeNöT) : uTaZNa áT : would like to travel over

*180L-120 = {*180+Lfrac}-120 > P_R_M_R T_S/Z_K_T SZáZHúSZ : PRéMáRuT SoK uTaZáS HoZ : fur goods (in accus.) are brought in from many journeys

{*180+SA+Lfrac} = *601 > P_R_M_R+S/Z T_S/Z_K_T : PRéMáRuS uTaZóKaT : fur-merchant travellers (in accus.)

53 (öTVeNHáRoM) : TáVoN HíR Mi : on distance news what

*180+SA+B = {*180+SA+RO} = *600 > P_R_M_R S/Z R : BáR MeRéSZ aRRa : eventhough bold that way

30 = 20+6+4 (HúSZ, HaT, NéGY) : HúZHaT iNGYé : can drag for free

A-[RE-VINa]-1-RO > A-[K_R-S/Z_L] eGY R : A[Ki RáSZáLL eGYRe] : who descend on one

JA-*180 > J/L P_R_M_R : Jó PRéMáRu : good fur commodity

137 = 100 aLá 37 (SZáZ aLá HaRMiNCHéT) : SZáZ áLHíR MeNNYi CéHeT : hundreds of rumours how many guild (in accus.)

160 = *415VAS-60 > SZaPu HaTVaN : SáPó’HaTVáN : could be taken cickback/bribes from


Tőke prémáru ura utazna át. Prémárut sok utazás hoz. Prémárus utazókat távon, hír mi bár merész, arra húzhat ingyé a[ki rászáll egyre]. Jó prémáru – száz álhír: mennyi céhet sápolhatván (vesztegethetne meg)?

Capital owner of fur goods would like to travel over. Fur goods are brought in from many journeys. The news, even though bold, can drag that way fur-merchant travellers who descend on one for free. Good fur commodity –hundreds of rumours – kickback/bribes from how many guilds could be taken?


Actually, in the following example the scribe talks explicitly about numeral 10 as part of the lettering (tízekkel szórakó = word-builder with tens!):


HT 95 (HM 1320) (GORILA I: 154-155)













De MiN-                                   -TáS





BáR CSiTuL                            TüZe





SZóToLó BűNT                       HoZ





KöNNYeN eSőBe’                  TűZ-





-GYuLLaDáS íTéLő BűNTe- -TéSe





KoPó áLLVa RaVaSZ Ű’-      -HeT









A-DU •10

ADVa TíZe-





-S TőLe BoNTa                       TíZe-              





                              -KKeL SZóRaKó





üDe MiN-                                -TáZó





BoR-CSeTLí-                          -TéS





KöNNYű Nő SZéPí-               -TéS





GYuLLaD SüTőLaPoN Te-    -TTeS





KiaBáLVa RáVeSZ Ü-            -TéS




Ez egy játék: a b. oldalon adva 4 kifejezés, mindegyik lejegyzésében szerepel a 10-es számjegy. Ezekből a kifejezésekből kell értelmes mondatokat összeállítani.

This is a play: there are 4 expressions given on side b. in which lettering numeral 10 is used. The task is to make these expressions into meaningful sentences.


In this script the new signs for us are

DA   D < Dúc < dúc (prop/strut)

DU  D_V_ < Dű’VE < (sétabotra) dűlve/dőlve (leaning against [a walking stick])

ME  M_N < MaN < man (crutch, 2 letters are cut off with the 2 strokes.)

MI  P/B_R < PeRs/PeRsely/BuRok < persely/burok (PuRse/caul)

NU  CS/C < CSő < cső (pipe/hose).

KU  K_N/Y < KáNYa < kánya (kite)

RU  T_L_P_N_T < TuLiPáNT < tulipánt (tulip!)


DA-DU-MA-TA+10 : DuDVa MiT KiTeSZ : weed/dung, what, one puts out

GRA : RoSSZ : bad

DA-ME+10 : De MiNTáS; üDe MiNTáZó : but, patterned; fresh, pattern maker

MI-NU-TE+10 : BáR CSiTuL TüZe; BoR-CSeTLíTéS : although, his/her/its fire calms down; vine-totter (slip of the tongue from drinking)

SA-RU+20 : SZóToLó BűNT HoZ : wordy/windbag, brings crime

KU-NI-SU+10 : KöNNYeN eSőBe’ TűZ-; KöNNYű Nő-SZéPíTéS : easily, in rain, fire-; light, improving the look of women

DI-DE-RU+10 : GYuLLaDáS íTéLő BüNTeTéSe; GYuLLaD SüTőLaPoN TeTTeS : burning is punishment of the Judge; culprit burns on grill

QE-RA2-U+7 : KoPó áLLVa RaVaSZ Ű’HeT : hound, standing, cunning, it can sit

A-DU+10 & SA-RU : ADVa TíZeS TőLe BoNTa (tarka/mintás) : it is given the ten, from it patterned

10+[KA-RA] : TíZeKKeL SZóRaKó : word-builder with tens

QE-RA2-U+10 : KiaBáLVa RáVeSZ ÜTéS : by yelling, s/he/it persuades, blow/hit


Dudva mit kitesz rossz de mintás. Bár csitul tüze, szótoló bűnt hoz könnyen. Esőben tűzgyulladás Ítélő büntetése. Kopó állva ravasz, ülhet.


Adva tízes, tőle bonta (mintás) tízekkel szórakó, üde mintázó: bor-csetlítés, könnyű nő szépítés, gyullad sütőlapon tettes, kiabálva rávesz ütés.

Weed/dung, what one puts out is bad, but patterned. Although his/her fire calms down, a wordy/windbag brings crime easily. In rain fire-burning is the punishment of the Judge. A standing hound is cunning, let it sit.

Given is ten, from it patterned word-builder with tens is fresh (refreshing) pattern maker: vine-totter (slip of the tongue from drinking), lightly improving the look of women, culprit burns on grill, blow/hit persuades by yelling.


Further on decipherment,

JGY states that “For me, vocabulary does not necessarily identify a language (English, for instance, has a large German, French and Classical Greek and Latin vocabulary); grammar would identify a specific language more securely. Thus, I am not immediately swayed by the process of identifying words in another language as Linear A words (e.g., KU-NI-SU in Linear A as the Semitic term for emmer wheat) -- this is not to say that I don't find such correspondences impressive and interesting.” I agree! (More so, knowing that KU-NI-SU stands for the K_N/Y N S/Z_B consonantal frame.) The readings I present here are expressions, sentences and rounded up (short) stories in a real language, with adequate vocabulary, the belonging fully fledged grammar of a living language, and common sense to the lot, not just a scientific snowball fetched on an unsubstantiated supposition.

Unfortunately JGY kills off the previous statement immediately with the following: “My own method has been strictly internal, to examine the texts as accounting documents, and to use the numbers to identify transaction terms and patterns in vocabulary, and then to pay special attention to vocabulary variations, especially in prefixes and suffixes, in order to tease out a grammar.” First of all, it has to be proven that those texts are “accounting documents”, that those numbers are always and solely numbers of a balance ledger, that is that they always add up. If one really want to pay attention to prefixes and suffixes, one should pay attention to agglutinative languages, as indeed suggested by Yves Duhoux, and quoted by JGY: “It has been recognised that Linear A contains a high number of affixes (prefixes & suffixes; Duhoux 1978), suggesting Linear A is "agglutinative rather than conjugating. " There is a high number of prefixes (59% of the words Duhoux singled out; Linear B has 12%), playing an important role "in expressing gender, case or derivation" or some other kind of syntactic relation (Schoep 2002, 45-46).” If this statement is true for the transcriptions of texts available on JGY’s website, one should wonder how much more is it true when the signs are transliterated using the consonantal frames of the pictograms. There is a fair chance that Duhoux may be right, so, our earlier incursion into the workings of an agglutinative language could be an appreciated help for those in the business of deciphering this “Martian” language.

When assigning ideas, abstract meanings to hieroglyphic signs one should consider very seriously David R. Olson’s statement: “It is an anachronism to attempt to explain the evo­lution of graphic signs as the attempt to express ideas via ideographs for there is no reason to believe that early writers had any clear notion of ideas prior to the invention of writing either.” If one already have a clear knowledge about the sounds, phonemes and all other monstrosity modern linguistics operates with, than why would one go into the hard labour of drawing complicated full detailed objects to represent those abstractions, when a simple geometric sign would do just the same? We have to accept Olson’s answer to this question “writing systems are developed for mnemonic and communicative purposes but because they are ‘read’ they provide a model for language and thought.

The consonantal frame expression I’m using in this paper is also too sophisticated a matter for the people in the process of inventing writing. In reality they were using pictograms to denote hard to draw objects’ names with objects of a rhyming name they could easily pictured. Actually, rhyme, in Magyar RíM, rhymes with the word RáMa (frame), which means that words in the same (consonantal) frame are said to rhyme with each other. This further means that one does not need to have any idea about sounds of speech, phonemes, morphemes, consonantal frames and other similar gizmos to read the Minoan hieroglyphic and linear writings, one only needs to name the pictogram and find a word rhyming with it, more suited to the context in case. By abstraction, by giving these (linear) picture-signs an abstract syllabary value, you are taking away their essence: the picture that people can recognise by analogy, name it, and again by analogy (by rhyming, using the acrophonic or rebus principle), even uneducated people, can find the rhyming words, that is they could read and understood the message the series of pictograms conveyed.

We are, actually, going from a naturally literate society to a mostly illiterate population, if to believe most recent statistics. There is a continuous progress, or rather a regression from:

- the Phaistos disc’s p01 sign picturing a walking man (GYaLoGoL), which reads G/Y_L as both the GYaL and the GoL syllable is contained in the drawn verb;

- the linear A’s JE  sign, which also draws the verb for walk (JáR) and stands for the two-letter J_R;

- the alphabet’s Λ also pictures a leap (Lép), or a leaping man λ;

to L, which is the “linear” drawing of a foot (Láb).

There is no need to teach people how to recognise an object/action from its two-dimensional (linear) drawing, it is an inborn capability of every man. Again, there is no need to teach people how to recognise rhyming words. The combination of the two faculties is reading of hieroglyphic writings, including linear A. With a little practise, everybody who knows the pictured language, can read the texts conveyed by the pictograms.  But somewhere on the line, people stepped using this organic knowledge, they forgot what the letters are picturing, they connect the signs to an abstractions, to a sounds with no relation whatsoever to the depicted content. The organic ties between speech and (hieroglyphic) writing is lost with the abstraction of sound values from the letter’s pictorial values.

Just to repeat once more for those to whom this paper is not “scientific” enough: writing and reading is not a science, not a trade and not an innovation, it is the discovery of a communication tool, the same as drawing or speaking, actually the natural combination of these two inherent faculties of human activity.


Commodities on roundels

The obsession that Minoans were using writings only for administering commodities are not restricted to tablets. “Roundels relate to a "conveyance of a commodity, either within the central administration or between the central administration and an external party" (Schoep 2002, 122) with the roundel being the record of this transaction that stays within the central administration as the commodity moves out of the transacting bureau (see Hallager 1996a).” Here is an easy to read example with just one so far not used sign,

        SE, which stands for S/Z_L_T_L < SZeLeTeL (cut to slices, slice):


GO Wc 1 (HM 83) (GORILA II: 2; Roundel 2: 11), from House Cf 25, "one of the older houses on the eastern slope of the hill; this area, Quarters C and D, probably went out of use after an LM IA destruction" (Weingarten, Aegaeum 5, 109-110, n. 30, citing Hood & Betancourt, both in Thera and the Aegean World, 1978, 685-86 and 384, respectively).






CMS II, 6 no.


b: BOSm



159: bull left


A-SA-SU-MA-I-SE : A SZó SZéP íM Ű SZóLíT eL : the word is good (nice), look, it is calling away

BOSm+5 : BÚT : sorrow/grief/distress (in accus.)


A szó szép, ím ű szólít el bút.

The word is good (nice), look, it is calling away the sorrow/grief/distress.


As you can see 5 (öT) stands for _T, most often as the accusative sign ~_T.

One could say that this is not a standard roundel, as it comes from a house, so here is an other roundel from a centre of administration:


HT Wc 3010 (HMpin 72) (GORILA II: 75; Roundel 2: 22) HT Wc Scribe 109?





a: *333-DI-NA-SU-KA



142 [AT 31]: Talismanic "fly"


*333-DI-NA-SU-KA : TőKeMéN üGYeLő - aNYaLó SZóPóKKaL : capital stud-farm master – mare(s) with sucklings (foals)


Tőkemén ügyelő – anyaló szopókkal.

Capital stud-farm master – mare(s) with sucklings (foals).


=/*333=ZU[3] : T_K_M_N/Y < ToKMáNY < tokmány (chuck)


The Libation Formula is a wonder translator program

which translates the inscriptions on vessels for offerings to the God(s) and works like this:

Oh!, at Place, PersonName to Asasara dedicates a dedication of/from SI-RU, I-NA-JA-PA-QA

 In the following inscription the Oh! invocation is: A-TA-I-*301-WA-JA; the PersonNames are: TU-RU-SA,  DU-PU3-RE and I-DA-A; the God Asasara is missing; the verb dedicates is U-NA-KA-NA-SI; the dedication is I-PI-NA-MA and comes from SI-RU as TE means ’of/from’. This is the end, with this the inscription is deciphered!

If you interested in the people, their feelings and reflections on life and death matters, than you have to read the inscription. And I can assure you, it is worth of the effort:



KO Za 1 (HM 2627) (GORILA IV: 18-20), stone base, chance find


a: A-TA-I-*301-WA-JA

b-c: TU-RU-SA •10 DU-PU3-RE 10 I-DA-A •10

c: U-NA-KA-NA-SI •10

c-d: I-PI-NA-MA •10 SI-RU-TE


cf. A-TU-RI-SI-TI [KN Zb 5].

The dots are 10-s as before.


List of the signs not used yet:

*301  L_NG/ING < LeNG/ ING < leng/ing (flutter/sway like the ribbon on the post)

WA  V_G < VéG < vég (piece/roll/bolt/length of linen)

TU  T_R < TúR/ó < túr/ó (push/dig or stainer for curd)

PU3  S/Z_T_N/Y_L < SZéTNYíLó < szétnyíló (opening); =*314; =PU2

RE  K_R < KaRó < karó (drying rake for vessels, note: RaKe is mirrored KaRó)

SI  S/Z_R < SZűR < szűr (long embroidered felt cloak of Hungarian shepherd, the linear drawing of p09 hiero on the Phaistos disc: , where it also stands for SZűR)


A-TA-I-*301-WA-JA  : ÁToK IJJoNG (ujjong) VéGüL : curse rejoices at the end

TU-RU-SA-10-DU : áTRa íTéLőBeN uTaST SZeDVe : for the other-world, in the court, traveller (in accus.), collecting

PU3-RE+10  : SZéTNYíL KéR íTéSZ : opens up asks for you judge

I-DA-A+10 : IDe A TűZ : to here the fire

U-NA-KA-NA  : ŰNáLa Ki eLLeNüL : at/for him who resists

SI+10+I-PI-NA : SZeReTő SZŰBeN aNNáL : in loving heart at him/her

MA+10 : áMíTó SZó : deluding word

SI-RU-TE : eSZéRe uTóLY BűNT íTéL : on his/her mind afterwards crime/sin (in accus.) will adjudge


Átok ijjong (ujjong), végül átra ítélőben utast szedve szétnyíl, kér ítész ide, a tűz űnála. Ki ellenül szerető szűben, annál ámító szó eszére utóly bűnt ítél.

Curse rejoices at the end, collecting travellers, the court for the other-world opens up, the judge asks you to here, the fire is at him. Who resists in one’s loving heart, at him/her deluding word on one’s own mind afterwards will adjudge crime/sin.


The following inscription is my favourite for its witty humour concerning death.


IO Za 6 (HM 3785) (GORILA V: 24-27), stone cup


TA-NA-I-*301-U-TI-NU •10 I-NA-TA-I-ZU-DI

SI-KA •10 JA-SA-SA-RA-ME •10



Here you can see NU (CSő = pipe) as a pipe both alongside and in cross-section on the facsimile drawing above! The dots are 10-s as always.


TA-NA-I-*301 : áToK eNYeL (tréfál) IJJoNG : curse is joking crows over

U-TI-NU+10 : UTaT SZaTóCS TeSZ : journey (in accus.) dealer/grocer makes

I-NA-TA-I-ZU-DI : ŰNáLa TőKe-ITóKa MeNNYi GYűL : on him vine-stock drink a lot collects

SI-KA+10 : SZeReKKeL TűZ : with remedies fire

JA-SA-SA-RA-ME+10 : Jó SZeSZeS Rá KóMáN TeSZi : is highly spirituous on it in coma puts you


Átok enyel (tréfál), ijjong, utat szatócs tesz. Űnála tőke-itóka (törköly!) mennyi gyűl, szerekkel tűz jó szeszes, rá kómán tesz.

Curse is joking, crows over, the dealer/grocer makes the journey. A lot of vine-stock drink (marc!) collects on him, with remedies fire is highly spirituous, he (the curse) puts him on it in coma.


One of the longest and relatively easily read inscription may shed the most light on the concept of religious belief of Minoans as projected by the Libation Formula and the reality as it is reflected in the readings of the inscriptions.


PK Za 11 (HM 1341) (GORILA IV: 32-34), stone libation table ; Bosanquet & Dawkins, "The Unpublished Objects from the Palaikastro Excavations, 1902-1906," BSA 24 (Supp. Paper 1; 1923) 143, no. 4) (probably Petsophas)


a-b: A-TA-I-*301-WA-E •10 A-DI-KI-TE-TE-[••]-DA10

b-c: PI-TE-RI10 A-KO-A-NE10 A-SA-SA-RA-ME •10

c: U-NA-RU-KA-NA-TI •10

d: I-PI-NA-MI-NA[ ]-SI-RU-[•] •10 I-NA-JA-PA-QA


a: GORILA says, "the last sign could be KI, U, or DU.

b: JGY: The first sign cannot be PU2, but PU is not impossible; the second sign, according to the photograph (p. 32), is probably RE. Thus, the word should more likely be: A-DI-KI-TE-TE-[DU-•]-RE or A-DI-KI-TE-TE-[DU-PU]-RE,

d: GORILA: "SI-RU-DU is not excluded."

d: instead of the form-suggested I-PI-NA-MI-NA we have the rational I-PI-SA-MI-SA reading.



A-TA-I-*301-WA-E+10 : ÁToK IJJoNG VéG E’TeSZ : curse crows over end/destiny puts you away

A-DI-KI-TE-TE-[DU : ÁGY LaKóT eLLáT LáDáVa’ : bed lodger (in accus.) furnish with trunk

SA]-DA+10 : S iDe TeSZ : and puts you here

PI-TE-RI+10 : BeNN úTTaL TöRőDiK TűZ : inside with journey fire is concerned

A-KO-A-NE+10 : AKaD Ki ANNYiT Se TeSZ : there are some who are doing less than that

A-SA-SA-RA-ME+10 : A SZó eSZeSRe KeMéNY TűZ/TuSa : the word on smart hard fire/inner struggle/crisis[4]

U-NA-RU-KA-NA-TI+10 : Ű eNNéL íTéL BűNT KeLLőN (helyesen/illőn) éLőT TiSZTíT S : he at this judges crime/sin (in accus.)  rightly/appropriately purifies living (in accus.) and

I-PI-NASA-MI-NASA[ : ŰBeNNe SZó-BeRéSZ : in it untrustworthy

KI-]SI-RU-[DU]+10 : Ki SZóRa íTéLőBeN TuDVa TeSZ : who on talk/gossip in the court knowingly puts you

I-NA-JA-PA-QA : INaL LoPóKéNT : runs away like a thief


Átok ijjong, vég eltesz, ágy lakót ellát ládával s ide tesz. Benn úttal törődik tűz, akad ki annyit se tesz. A szó eszesre kemény tűz/tusa, ű ennél ítél bűnt, kellőn (helyesen/illőn) élőt tisztít, s űbenne szó-berész (adott szavát csereberélő), ki szóra ítélőben tudva tesz, inal lopóként.

Curse crows over, end/destiny puts you away, bed furnishes its lodger with trunk and puts you here. Inside, a  fire is concerned with your journey, there are some who are doing less than that. The word on smart (people) is hard fire/inner struggle, he at this (fire/crisis) judges crime/sin, rightly/appropriately purifies living, and in it untrustworthy, who in the court knowingly puts you on talk/gossip, runs away like a thief.


And lastly here is an inscription which perfectly adheres to the Libation Formula. You can try to gain some information on Minoans with the help of the formula and/or you can read the inscription on the Libation Table and may learn some bits and pieces about their belief. One should not expect to much from these short texts, but it is immensely more than what one can get from a formula which by its nature up front determines the domain of the answer it can provide.


IO Za 2 (HM 3557) (GORILA V: 18-19), square Libation Table, serpentine, with 5 facets per side and one at each corner, making 24 facets in all. Line 1 goes all the way around the Table, its signs being placed one in a facet, its first sign placed in the first facet of side a just after the left corner (whose facet contains the last sign, MA). The signs of Line 2 do not go all the way around the table; they start below the beginning of line 1 and end somewhere on side c or at the beginning of side d; these signs are placed more or less below the ridges that divide the facets above. Line 1, therefore, should contain 24 signs; line 2 contained 13-26 signs. Word divisions in line 1 are on the ridges separating facets. Holes were drilled part-way through the corners, perhaps to hold a lid or some vertical attachments (cf. KN Za 10).


.1: A-TA-I-*301-WA-JA •10 JA-DI-KI-TU •10 JA-SA-SA-RA[-ME •10 U-NA-KA-NA-]SI [•10] I-PI-NA-MA •10

.2: SI-RU-TE •10 TA-NA-RA-TE-U-TI-NU •10 I-DA-[


Line 1 has all signs perfectly placed. Line 2 is problematic, but probably ended with a word of 6 signs, the first of which is I- (for the second sign, GORILA reads DA, but it could be something else). In the attached illustration, JGY hypothesizes a word-divider on side d between -NA-SI • and I-PI-NA-; on the other sides word-dividers are placed exactly in the center of the ridges dividing the niches. On side d, the 3rd ridge from the left corner is preserved well enough that it is possible that it carried no word-divider.


A-TA-I-*301-WA-JA+10  : ÁToK IJJoNG VéG LeTeSZ : curse crows over end/destiny puts you down

JA-DI-KI-TU+10 : LáGYuL KiTaRTáS : persistence loses vigour

JA-SA-SA-RA[-ME+10 : Jó SZó öSSZeSRE KiMeNTéS : good word is apology for the lot

U-NA-KA-NA-SI  : ŰNáLa Ki eLLeNüL SoRRa : at him who resists one after the other

10 : TűZi; uTaS : pins (it) on; traveller

I-PI-NA-MA+10 : Ű BeNNeN áLMáT iS : his/her inner dream (in accus.) as well

SI-RU-TE+10 : SoRRa íTéL BűNT íTéLeTeS : in turn he passes judgement on crime/sin (in accus.) sentencing

TA-NA-RA-TE : áToKNáL SíRóKTóL : at curse from crying

U-TI-NU : UTaT áZTaTTYa (TY<CS) : road (in accus.) wet through

I-DA-[  : IDe [ : to here


Átok ijjong, vég letesz, lágyul kitartás. Jó szó összesre kimentés űnála. Ki ellenül (annak) sorra tűzi ű bennen álmát is, sorra ítél bűnt. Ítéletes átoknál síróktól utat áztattya utas ide ...

Curse crows over, end/destiny puts you down, persistence loses vigour. A good word to him is apology for the lot. Who resists, to that he pins on his/her inner dreams one after the other as well, in turn he passes judgement on crime/sin. From the crying at sentencing curse travellers wet trough the road to here ...


I’m sorry for those readers who, by not speaking Minoan/Hungarian, are missing out on the easy flow of the readings, except for the couple of  (nearly) forgotten  words. To the critiques (mostly Hungarian speaking), who objects exactly to this fluent reading in today’s Magyar, I must say that they should be ashamed not knowing the basic workings of their native language. Magyar is an agglutinative, root-based language, in which hundreds or even thousands of words are derived from the same root-word. If one changes a consonant in the consonantal frame of the root-word, one has to make that same change simultaneously in the whole word-family based on that root-word, or the word-family splits up. Because it is impossible to change simultaneously thousands of words, a language is either agglutinative, based on never (extremely slowly) changing root-words or else. Minoan belonged to this never changing root-based agglutinative languages and lived on in Carian, Lydian, Lucian, Thracian, … to Hungarian, (should be) known by the common name: Scythian. (The historical Scythian-Hun-Magyar continuity could be never wiped out of the common memory, in spite of all the efforts by the Hapsburg installed German linguists and historians, who’s anti-national mentality lives on even today as the aftermath of  inbreeding in academic circles.)

The writing system changed from hieroglyphic, through linear, rovás (runic), alphabetic to the Latin set of characters, and the method changed from rebus and acrophonic based consonantal to mixed, defective notation of vowels to full sound notation. For me, this is a regression we have to live with.

And here this three-letter texts tells about the writing implements and surfaces the Minoans employed:


MA Ze 11 (Palace of Malia) (GORILA IV: 140), incised on block: palace: south of the NW corridor

     QE-SI-TE > K_P_L_F/V S/Z_R T_L : Kő-PaLaVeSSZő – íRóToLL : stone-slate pencil – quill pen

The text is (1) incised on a (stone) block, offers (2) slate (Dutch) pencils to write on stone slates, and (3) quill pens to write using ink on various surfaces from parchment to ceramics, and thanks to the most numerous (4) clay tablets written on by style (stylus), than accidentally fired and consequently survived to our days, making it possible to decipher this concise message about writing implements and surfaces the Minoans has utilised. All this is said with just three letters! Than one should ask: which writing system is  the more advanced, theirs our ours?


Chicken or egg first?

There are two statements on JGY’s website which may have hindered greatly the decipherment, apart from the never proved, but readily accepted assumption on the syllabary nature of the writing. The first states that “the identifying term for the "pictogram" cannot be proved in advance of deciphering the script”, the chicken or egg first question. The other, on the subject of Cretan hieroglyphic and linear writings, wonders “why two such different scripts should have developed more or less contemporaneously unless they represent two different administrative practices and/or two different languages or dialects (Schoep 2002, 22-23).” In the following example, I will make an effort to show how erroneous these statements are.


The KH 11 (KH MUS.) (GORILA III: 38-39) (LM IB context) inscription has three only on this, nearly intact, tablet occurring signs, but the tablet’s reading is still possible.


1. line:  has two, for us, new signs:

ZA  Z < ZSák < zsák (Zak, sack);

CYP  V_S/Z < VéSZ < vész (tempest, disaster), pictured as a tempest blowing the palm leaves from left to right (in Hungarian everything bad comes from the left!)


A-DU-[•]-ZA > A-DU-[RE]-ZA > A-D_V-[K_R]-Z > A DúVa’ [KöRö]Z : with plunder/loot he circles

CYP+Kfrac > V_S/Z+_N : VíZeN :  on water


2. line: , the only new sign is 3 (HáRoM).


SU+3 > S/Z_P H_R_M : SáP/ZáP HaRaMia : tribute collector or vulture/rotten  brigand/bandit

CYP+Efrac > V_S/Z+_S : VéSZeS : fatal

Kfrac+L2frac > _N+T_S/Z_K_T : iNTéS KiT : warning whom

VINa-PA > S/Z_L- P/B :SZéLBe : in the wind


3. line: , here the new sign is 4 (NéGY) and *348 , the first of the only here occurring signs, for which, all the same, we have all the needed faculties on hand to find out what this sign represents. Even though it is not that obvious from the drawing, we can guess what it depicts: a flower, maybe a tulip or some liquid pouring out of a (vine-)glass, who to say? Actually, the context of the so far deciphered text will help us in this regard, even more so when we add the known letters from this line:


*306+4 > P_L+N_G/Y : BoLYoNGó : roaming/roving

CYP > V_S/Z :VíZi : water-

RO-*348-CYP+Kfrac > R ? V_S/Z+_N : őR ... VéSZeN/VeSSZeN : guard ... in danger/let lose


A dúval [körö]z vízen sáp/záp haramia. Vészes intés, kit szélbe bolyongó vízi őr ... vészen/vesszen

The rotten bandit circles on water with his loot. Fatal warning, whom in winds roaming/roving water guard … in danger/let lose


By experimenting with a few verbs concerning liquids, the right solution came in seconds: KiDű’T/i (it spilled out/he spills it out), when put in the text, we get the following:


RO-*348-CYP+Kfrac > R K_D_T V_S/Z+_N : őRKöDő TéVeSSZeN : guard did lose sight of


It makes perfect sense in the context, and look at the sign again: in the middle of the glass a line indicates the flow of liquid out and down, which is spill in essence.


4. line: . Here for us new, but regular sign  TO (T) occurs twice, on both sides of the only once occurring *349  sign. As the second sign from it, I is a vowel that starts a new word/expression, the sign directly following *349, the TO (T) sign with a good chance is the suffix ~_T, marking the object of the sentence. But what is that object? A snake? A rope? Yes, to be more precise, a bending rope (HaJLó KöTéL), which rhymes with HaJó-LéK áTéLő (ship-LeaK(!) survivor).


L2frac > T_S/Z_K_T : TuSZKó’T/TuSaKó’T : forced with arms

A-TO-*349-TO-I > A-T-H_J_L K_T_L-T I : ÁT HaJó-LéK áTéLőT Ű : over ship-leak survivor (in accus.) he

CYP+Efrac > V_S/Z+_S : VéSZeS : dangerous


5. line:


3 (HáRoM) : HaRaMia : brigand/bandit

FIC-1 > F_G-_GY : FoGaGGYa : let receive it

VINa-3 > S/Z_L-H_R_M : SZéL HáRMa : wind’s harm (HaRM!)

A-TA-*350 > A-T_K : ÁToK  ... : curse ...

The last sign, *350  is the third, on this tablet and in the entire Linear A corpus just once occurring signs: it is the picture of a man with a string hanging to his right hand, meaning hi is tied, that is: married. He is a husband (FéRJ), which rhymes with VeRJe, the thrash/flog verb frequently connected with curse in its imperative mood: let it thrash or flog him.


A-TA-*350 > A-T_K F_R_J : ÁToK  VeRJe : let the curse thrash/flog him



6. line:


*301 > L_N_G : éLeNGő : addicted

1-*306 > _GY+P_L : aGYáBóL : from his mind

SY > S/Z_R : SZóRa : on word

CYP +Kfrac+L2frac > V_S/Z+_N+T_S/Z_K_T : ViSZoNT SZóKaT : answer to a reply


A dúval [körö]z vízen sáp/záp (sápot v. sarcot szedő/romlott) haramia. Vészes intés, kit szélbe bolyongó vízi örködő tévesszen, tuszkolt át hajó-lék átélőt. Ű vészes haramia, fogadja szél hárma, átok verje élengő (szenvedély-függő) agyából szóra viszont szókat.

The rotten bandit circles on water with his loot. Fatal warning, whom in winds roaming water guard did lose sight of, forced with arms ship-leak survivors over (the ocean). He is a dangerous bandit, let wind’s harm receive him, let curse thrash from his addicted mind the words to answer a reply.


I hope I could demonstrate on this last example how identification of the pictogram and deciphering, in our case reading the script goes hand in hand by aiding each other. And this is true for the reading of the hieroglyphic texts generally: the reader is actively involved all the time in identifying the pictogram, naming it, and finding a rhyming fit for the context. Reading these writings is like solving a crossword puzzle: one always has to keep in agreement both pictorially and phonetically the words in the puzzle of the context.[5] There is no difference whatsoever between hieroglyphic and linear writings, except for the fact that the last mentioned is drawn with simple lines, without shading and other painting techniques, and has a more established set of letters.

Word separation by dot or “hyphenisation” is nonsense, because the “hyphenation” signs (•, -, I ) are a phonetic signs for T_S/Z (TíZ) or _G/Y (eGY), and as any other multi-consonantal sign, T_S/Z may be separated into two words in the flow of the texts. LinA doesn’t indicate word separation in any way or form. Even in the alphabetic writings word-separation is only a recent practice.

To those who still don’t believe that this writing is a short explanatory description of reading rules for LinA, but are work-shy or unable to examine it and to ascertain about it themselves, there is consolation. They can take the rules expressed above as a Wonder-Thinker Formula – similar to the Libation Formula – which, by replacing the LinA signs, or the syllabaries in transcriptions, with the word-root values given in the LinA rovásjelek - (runic) signs chart, will begin some wonderful thoughts in Magyar (unfortunately for some). The Libation Formula and the Balance Ledger Formula can only generate who to whom or what telephone directory-like, senseless (and baseless) lists. Contrary to these empty words, with this Wonder-Thinker Formula, for example, by replacing PI with its B_N value from the chart; MI with P/B_R; TA with T_K; TI with T_T_S/Z_T; RA2 with R_V_S/Z in

TRO Zg 1, spindle whorl (Berlin Museum; Godart 1994, 714-17, fig. 5 on p. 722) we’ll get this Hungarian sentence with a correct syntactic structure:

PI-MI-TA-TI-RA2 > BűNPáRTi Ki TeTTeST RáVeSZ > Bűnpárti ki tettest rávesz. (Accessory to a crime is who persuades the perpetrator.)


In TRO Zg 2, spindle whorl (Berlin Museum; Godart 1994, 714-17, fig. 5 on p. 722) the first syllabary changes to DU, which the formula replaces with the D_V word-root, making the following reading:

DU-MI-TA-TI-RA2 > DúVa’ BiRToK TeTTeST RáVeSZ > Dúval birtok tettest rávesz. (Possession with ease of looting persuades the perpetrator.)


The eternal truth expressed in these two (related) sentences I could never put on paper in this concise form (as it is in Magyar) without this “Wonder-Thinker Formula”. It knows how to take things more simply than they are, so, I highly recommend it to all my sceptical readers, it is a good fun.


To conclude, from the above explained methods and rules, the observant reader could understand that with these readings I did not even try to reconstruct how the Minoans were speaking. I do not know, because it is physically impossible as there are no sound records of it, how did people pronounce 4000 years ago the word füge (fig) on Crete, Rhodes, or in Baranya. Neither the people, who are reciting the Halotti beszéd (the oldest known Hungarian text in ABC-notation) in a supposedly Middle-aged intonation, know how it really sounded then. This is nothing more than cheap antics (but not ancient!), and from the linguists’ part, the whole lot is not more than bookish hocus-pocus disguised as science.

With these readings I only maintain that in the time of the Minoans the inherence, tuning, harmony or rhyming between the word FüGGő and FüGe were the same as today. This is the only reasonable explanation why they marked the fig (FüGe) fruit with the linear drawing of earrings (FüGGő). As they used the same sign to write down the words FüGG (depends), FoGó (handle), FoG (hold, tooth, cog), etc., these words also sounded alike then. All these words were related and rhyming then and are now, they were and are still the same large word-family.

It would be hypocrisy on my part inventing and dressing up some archaic “Minoan” pronunciation for the word füge (fig) such as puga, bogya, biga, püge or any other form – deduced by backwards reasoning – from its today’s pronunciation. But the fact is that the word-families of the Magyar language – despite of their denial by the academics – are alive and virulent just the same as 4000 years ago. Every Hungarian speaker knows this intuitively, in vain is their school’s effort to fill the heads with a nonsensical grammar. Thanks to these live word-families – the root-system of the Magyar language – we can read and understand the Minoan inscriptions in today’s Magyar.

The linguistics only can relay on these readings, which are consistent, coherent and contextual readings for the whole corpus, supported with the caption of the pictograms. By no means linguists could deny this. A matter of fact is that this row of letters, you are reading at this very moment, has some meaning in a language or has not. If you can read and understand its message than we speak the same language. The same goes with the readings (not interpretations!) of the Minoan texts. One only can ignore this fact, talk beside its point or acknowledge it, with reluctance in the beginning...

[1]     This definition is as ridiculous as it can be! As the sign  FIC doesn’t resemble the commodity fig, people would only no what it represents if one tells them – in words – of course, how else? They either know by word  the “thing or idea” the writing represents or they have no idea at all what it stands for.

[2]     In Minoan/Magyar body parts coming in pairs are counted in halves: FéL-kezű (half-handed) is a man who lost one of his hands. Men with such deficiencies have any reason to FeeL FieR from life’s challenges: these HaLF-handed/leged/… men often need HeLP (F>P). So, there is a logical connection between HaLF and HeLP transmitted with FeeL FieR based on FéL! Similarly KeTTő > KöT (Two > Tie); in HáRoM (three) – HáRaM (HaRM) relation the connection between három and three is nearly lost. (ThRee > ThRow away (de-TRi-tion) = HáRaM-lik > HáRoM!) I know what the ruling linguistic paradigm is, but there is too much of these “accidental” coincidences to just ignore them. A good solution to a problem should solve more than it was proposed for. Indeed, the reading of Linear A texts I introduce here shed light even on some structural elements of the English language, which is much more than I aimed for!

[3]     The two seemingly different signs denote the same (four-)letter from 12 October 2013 on JGY website

[4]     The sign for T_S/Z is a poke or push (ToSZ) of the stylus (•) or a pinned (TűZ) mark as (-), but they are treated equally as either number 10 (TíZ) or the two-letter T_S/Z. In readings this duality can multiply determined by the context, but there are two interesting readings of it on the libation vessels: TűZ (fire) is the torment one suffers burning in front of the curse (judge/heaven/hell that is in inferno); the other is TuSa (agony, inner struggle). By reading the inscriptions, one has the feeling that the Minoans did not sharply separated the two. The outer world is only the mirror image of their inner being. As in heaven …

[5]     This makes the effort of some “half-minded” people to discredit these readings with their “sensational discovery” that word-frames (very short consonantal writings) can have more than one readings, a very miserable attempt. These people are incapable to understand (or they are trollers, taking their readers for a ride) that they discovered just one half of the essence of both the rebus principle for hieroglyphic writings and the consonantal writing systems, but they should make some effort to learn the other half of it as well. In the beginning of literacy most of the texts were ‘in situ’ that is contextual, so there was never any doubt which of the rhyming words should be used in the given location.