Rosetta Stone-Decoding the Demotic Text

Originally posted by Flipper Originally posted by Petro Invictus Originally posted by akritas This thread has 21 pages and only 5-6 pages consern the Rosetta Stone. All the others focus in the Slavonic origin of the ancient�Greek Macedonians with sources the �wiki and FYROMacedonians propagandistic�spots�.!!!! � Akritas, come on, you posted a third of it! And most of it really irrelevant and distracting! To the contrary I am still waiting for you to take the challenge and CRACK the Demotic text with me, just for fun, and see how great these pseudo-scientists are, to even devise such a cunning way to read the Demotic text, and at the same time sound Slavic! Let us expose their FRAUD! Your scientists have still not gained any attention Petro...It is you that post copy paste propaganda from a site that quote Plutarch (who poses Alexander and Macedonians as Greek) selectively to prove things.You have posted 293847239847124 posts and completely avoided my quostions. Don't think you will burry what I wrote. I will still keep asking and I will remind you what the community believes about the work of T&B.

Well, it takes time for the scientific community to acknowledge their work or at least proclaim it a perfect fraud!

And I am still inviting you to be scientific and crack some codes with me here, just for fun, to see how amazing these professors of mine are.

You still haven't answered any of my questions too...and I was merely replying to your posts, so that the readers won't get a wrong impression about the work of the two scientists, because if you remember you were just focused on discrediting their status, competence, work...when in fact we agreed that there is incompetence among the participants! This is due to the fact that we spent 5-6 pages determining the difference between some linguistic terms such as: TRANSLATION, TRANSLITERATION and DECODING.

LET me refresh you memory! SO FAR:

1. We cannot find a full translation of the Demotic text from the Rosetta stone.

2. No-one can read it phonetically! Say, pronounce the symbols, and their equivalents, in English, we do not know how was the text decoded (if it was at all, meaning the process as in comparison to the Greek text or the Hierogliphic), and how much it resembles the Coptic or the Egyptian language you claim it to be!


3. There are indications that it was a script used for personal correspondence.

4. We know it was the original text on the Rosetta stone, so it seems that Ptolemy was using this script to announce the decree, to be later translated in the Hieroglyphic and Greek text.

5. We have seen that the Demotic script was in use by many languages. Why not Macedonian, the language of the rulers of Egypt at that time?

So far, we couldn't find any study of the Demotic script? Like the research paper of Tentov and compare them?

This is due to the fact that the Demotic text has been TRANSLITERATED, based on the Greek text.

So let us SUM UP:

1. The work of Tome Boshevski and Aristotel Tentov offer a systematic analysis of the Demotic text from the Rosetta stone.

2. The basic assumption of their analysis was that in the middle text of the Rosetta Stone a syllabic script of only the consonant - vowel type is used. This assumption means a new direction in studying the demotic script and syllabic scripts from that period, unlike the concept of current scholarship of the wiring for sound of only the syllabic signs with consonants, while at the same time ignoring the vowels.

3. Up until now the research studies of the Demotic text from the Rosetta stone has not produced a systematic analysis of the phonetic representation of the Demotic script. The book titled as The Rosetta stone by E.A. Wallis Budge that you quoted above, offers TRANSLITERATION of the middle text from the Rosetta stone, based on a word-by-word assumption ( not a PHONETIC decodin of the text) in comparison to the Greek text at the bottom of the stelae.

Take a look:

http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/projects/dem/

http://books.google.com/books?id=ELJG-O9mG_wC&pg=PP1&ots=bP3g1U989o&dq=The+Rosetta+Stone+by+Wallis+Budge&sig=c2KVh0KUzfxjE7jhX-LBMaxEQmw

4. Tome Boshevski and Aristotel Tentov give the full system of phonetics in the Demotic script, which does not contradict the achievements of the international scientific community. Moreover it supplements it!

5. This TRANSLATION of the Demotic text from the Rosetta stone is the only THOROUGH study of this text.

NOTE: We are not talking about the whole of Demotic studies, with all the forms of Demotic used by Persians, Egyptians or other people in the antiquity. We are discussing the Demotic of the Ptolemy era, which was used for personal correspondence and was identified as "decument writing". So the ruler Ptolemy, a descendant of the Macedonians, and closely related to Alexander the Great, could have used the script to declare the decree in his own mother tongue, which was different from Koine-the adminsitrative "Esperanto" of the ancient world, which was later to be translated in Egyptian (using the Hierogliphic script), and Greek (with the Greek script).

6. So the basic assumption here is that the Rosetta stone is TRILINGUAL, not bilingual as considered so far. Or the other hand, there are other stellas containing three scripts, among which the Demotic, and are listed as TRILINGUAL.

So if all the other stellas were written in THREE SCRIPS and are TRILINGUAL, why would the Rosetta stone be different? Why would the rulers of Egypt at that time, who did not speak the Egyptian until Cleopatra, use two Egyptian langauges with two different scripts?

7. The argument in support of Tome Boshevski and Aristotel Tentov's thesis is the translation of the Greek text from the Rosetta stone, where it says that the decree should be inscribed on a hard stone in three scripts, and it classifies the Demotic as the script used for the "native" language. Native to whom? The people, or the rulers?


You can study their research on the following sites:

http://www.exploringmacedonia.com/wbstorage/Files/Roseta_Stone-26-2-2005-Boshevski-Tentov-english.pdf

http://rosetta-stone.etf.ukim.edu.mk/



Edited by Petro Invictus - 07-Dec-2007 at 09:37

Originally posted by Petro Invictus Well if you can read the ancient Greek you might guess the Slavic meaning! It means that the Hellenic form of the name is a translation of the original in Demotic... When I spoke of Hellenic names I meant about Philip, Ptolemy... However, Hellenic is quite different from Greek today, taking into account the population exchange with Turkey, the 400 years of Ottoman rule, the raids of the Crusaiders...

And what does Philip, Ptolemy etc mean in Slavic? Nothing...They are Greek names.

Where is Drago and Svetlana?

After 2000 years all languages are different. It is the natural evolution of speech. Before the Greek of today you had Byzantine Greek which is a continuation of Koine. 400 years of Ottoman rule gave load words not different grammar. The grammar was simplified already with Koine. The populations that came from Turkey were Ionians and Pontians. What language do Pontians speak? Moreover, we do not speak pontian in Greece, except from the native speakers who speak it within the family. Our demotic is based on Attic.

Also I would love to hear an explanation from you, how a Pontian from remote areas like Uzbekistan, that do not speak common Greek but only Pontian, can conversate with other Greeks? Not at a high level, but a good one.

The question again is...Why did Macedonians have Greek names? And not just ordinary names but names like "Hellas"?


Edited by Flipper - 07-Dec-2007 at 18:17

Petro one more question...

Do you see UKIM as a university you trust 100%? I mean do you respect all works presented there or will you stick only with T&B?

Would you accept other historic views of people working there?

I have followed this thread from the beginning and I would really, really appreciate it if people could stop "copy-pasting" tons of text and Egyptian alphabets  that nobody reads or understands..

I think that if that was the case there would be more people participating in it.

Originally posted by Petro Invictus Originally posted by akritas This thread has 21 pages and only 5-6 pages consern the Rosetta Stone. All the others focus in the Slavonic origin of the ancient Greek Macedonians with sources the  wiki and FYROMacedonians propagandistic spots .!!!!   Akritas, come on, you posted a third of it! And most of it really irrelevant and distracting! To the contrary I am still waiting for you to take the challenge and CRACK the Demotic text with me, just for fun, and see how great these pseudo-scientists are, to even devise such a cunning way to read the Demotic text, and at the same time sound Slavic! Let us expose their FRAUD!

Edited by akritas - 07-Dec-2007 at 14:50

If anyone is interested to read and listen to scholarly work on the Rosetta Stone here it is from the British Museum:

Flipper there're few Thracian inscriptions bearing a non-Greek text but in Greek alphabet: the Ezerovo ring, the bustrophedon inscription from Kjolmen, two findings from Duvanli (IIRC on a ring and on a vessel) and maybe some few other very short fragments. Most of the knowledge of Thracian doesn't come from inscriptions but from glosses in Greek texts and Thracian names (anthroponymy, toponymy, etc.).

Originally posted by Petro Invictus Macedonians put it in use in the 4th century BC. Why can't you find inscriptions in Greek before this period ANYWHERE in Macedonia.

Originally posted by Chilbudios So, Flipper, let me get it straight: - Greeks do not make grammatical mistakes - when Greek texts are found outside actual territory of Greece and FYROM we can talk about colonies and Hellenization, but not inside.   In that site do as I have instructed, choose "Thrace and Lower Danube"  link and feel free to browse the inscriptions. I didn't mean a certain inscription but the large number of inscriptions in Greek from this area compared to the number of inscriptions in Thracian.

Ofcourse...But YH could be used in very few cases only if a vowel comes before.

E.G: ΕΥΗ (EVI)

Now to write ΣΗΥ where you have S instead of a vowel is pretty absurd. Especially when the specific example is a printed coin of Seuthes (Who was ofcourse not Greek).

For your second question. Do you mean that Pella, Vergina, Aigea, Aiani, Sindos, Apidaia, Argos Orestikon and Therma were colonies? And what was Macedonian then? Is there anything else left?

Olynthos, Potidaia etc were indeed works of Chalkidean and Corinthian settlers but that is evident not just from the historical records but as well from the material culture.

Now, I will have a closer look at the inscriptions...Most of them so far however are indeed from colonies. Others are from AD and are both in Greek and Latin.

What I'm looking for is a pre-Hellenistic inscription from Thrace. Then I think we can start comparing about hellenic influence.


Edited by Flipper - 07-Dec-2007 at 17:58

Originally posted by akritas Originally posted by Petro Invictus Originally posted by akritas This thread has 21 pages and only 5-6 pages consern the Rosetta Stone. All the others focus in the Slavonic origin of the ancient�Greek Macedonians with sources the �wiki and FYROMacedonians propagandistic�spots�.!!!! � Akritas, come on, you posted a third of it! And most of it really irrelevant and distracting! To the contrary I am still waiting for you to take the challenge and CRACK the Demotic text with me, just for fun, and see how great these pseudo-scientists are, to even devise such a cunning way to read the Demotic text, and at the same time sound Slavic! Let us expose their FRAUD! No continue, actually allempires staff allowing these� Panslavic theories that show Egyptian, Greek and un-decipher��texts as Slavmacedonians. What I have to said are clear in my first posts. � I am not play propagandistic games.The inferiority complex of these lads (and you as a copy-paster) is without end.

Akritas but you copy-paste a lot too. In fact, I learned it from you here! Remember I am the new one!

On the other hand, I copy-paste only quotes and of course the charts from Tome Boshevski and Aristotel Tentov, necessary to present the issue here. And I always give the source, at the beginning I had problems with the application here, but I got the most of it I think!

   

Edited by Petro Invictus - 07-Dec-2007 at 19:03