quote: I say he is very conscious about his so-called translations being fake, but wants to latch onto it, in the hopes of getting credit for an astonishing 'breakthrough' disovery
Agreed and will add, some many not have caught on to the fact that Winters discourse is - ego driven - not finally, so much Afrocentric as Ego-centric.
If Winters students will listen with alert minds they will see that what Winters is *asserting* is not the glory of Africa, but mere self-glorification.
This is your opinion founded on the jealousy of a person who wants to contribute to the debate on Africana history, but affaird to do so in professional circles because of an inferiority complex.
My decipherment of Meroitic was basic science. In science you test a hypothesis. The Classical writers claimed that the Indians influenced Meroitic civilization. This hypothesis predicted that if the Indians influenced Meroitic civilizationwe we would find elements of Indian civilization in the Meroitic Sudan.
My decipherment confirmed this hypothesis with internal and external evidence:
1. Classical evidence that Indians influenced the Meroitic civilization after the death of their king.
2. Jaina textual evidence that an Indian group left their homeland after their king was killed supporting the statements of Classical writers.
3. Archaeological evidence of Indian communities in Egypt and Ethiopia (supported by textual evidence) that they were in close proximity to the Meroitic Empire and could have easily made their way to the the Empire.
4.Cognate signs from Kharosthi that relate to Meroitic symbols.
5. Cognate Meroitic and Kushana, lexical items, grammar and verbs that agree with findings of other researchers.
6. Cognate Sudan and Central Asian toponyms.
7. Finally, my decipherment allows any researcher to read all the Meroitic inscriptions .
Below is the first Meroitic inscription I deciphered from Mussawarat es-Sufra:
Reading from right to left we have the following Meroitic words
Nem pkh ote
These Meroitic words were compared to Kushana lexical items. In Kushana these words had the following meaning:
Nam = tendency
Pak = to aim
Ote = Wonderment
This allowed me to read the Musawwarat es-Sufra inscription as follows: "The tendency (is) to aim (for this) Wonderment(sex)!
Once I had made this breakthrough I knew the Kushana language was the key to reading Meroitic
You have not presented any evidence disputing these facts. This confirms that my research is science based i.e., hypothesis testing--your comments are jealousy driven.
You hate the fact that Afrocentric scholars make claims, not always supported by the status quo, and then support claims with evidence; while you on the otherhand, only parrot whatever theory Europeans support so you can claim justification of your ideas, based on the fact they are accepted by Europeans.
You have been so brainwashed by Eurocentrism, you just can't believe that an African can accomplish anything without the guidance of Europeans. You are sad indeed.
quote:.Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The Kushana hypothesis was based on the following evidence, 1) no African language has been found to be a cognate language of Meroitic 2) the Classical literature says that the Kushites lived in Asia and Africa; 3) the Gymnosophists, or "naked sages" of Meroe came from India.
Before I began work on Meroitic, other researchers had already falsified the African theory for Meroitic's cognate language.
The comparative method was used to find the cognate language of Meroitic. Using this method Meroitic scholars have compared the "known" Meroitic terms to vernacular African languages to establish morphological cognition between Meroitic and an African language. Up to now these linguistic comparisons failed to reveal the cognate language of Meroitic.
Researchers working on the Meroitic language do not believe that it was a member of the Afro-Asian group. Griffith and Haycock tried to read Meroitic using Nubian.
K.H. Priese, tried to read the Meroitic text using Eastern Sudani; and F. Hintze, attempted to compare Meroitic with the Ural-Altaic group. Siegbert Hummel, compared the "known" Meroitic words to words in the Altaic family which he believed was a substrate language of Meroitic. The fact that not even Nubian, a language spoken by a people who live today in the former Meroitic empire, failed to be the cognate language of Meroitic made it clear that we must look elsewhere for the cognate language spoken by the Meroites.
Flavius Philostratus, the writer of the Vita Apollonii, Vol. 1,cliamed that the Gymnosophists of Meroe originally came from India (see F.C. Conybeare, Philostratus:The Life of Apollonius of Tyana (p.45),1950). Given the fact that the Kushana had formerly ruled India around the time that the Meroitic writing was introduced to the Kushite civilization, lead to the hypothesis that the ancestors of the Gymnosophist may have been Kushana philosophers.
The historical evidence of the Kushana having ruled India made the Classical references to Indians in Meroe, an important source for the construction of alternative theories about the possible location of the cognate language of Meroitic.
There is external evidence, which supports my theory. A theory explains observed phenomena and has predictive power. I have theorized that due to the claims of the Classical writers that some of the Meroites came from India (F.C Conybeare (Trans.), Philostratus: The life of Apollonius of Tyana Vol.2, (1950) pg.271). According to the Life of Apollonius, the Indian Meroites were formerly led by a King Ganges, who had "repulsed the Scythians who invaded this land [India from] across the Caucasus" (Conybeare, Vol.1, Pg.273). Pilostratus also made it clear that the Indians of Meroe came to this country after their king was killed.
The presence of this tradition of an Indian King of the Indian-Meroites conquering the Scythians predicts that the Indian literature should record this historical episode. This prediction is supported by a Jaina text called the Kalakeharya-Kathanaka, which reports that when the Scythians invaded Malwa, the King of Malwa, called Vikramaditya defeated the Scythians (H. Kulke & D. Rothermund, History of India (London, Routledge: 1990, pg.73). This king Vikramaditya may be the Ganges mentioned in the Life of Apollonius.Confirmation of the Ganges story, supports the Classical literary evidence that their were Indianized-Meroites that could have introduced the Tokharian trade language to the Meroites.
Moreover, there were other Indians in North Africa in addition to Kush/Meroe. For example, at Quseir al-Qadim there was a large Indian speaking community (see: R. Salomon, "Epigraphic remains of Indian traders in Egypt", Journal of the American oriental Society, (1991) pp.731-736; and R. Salomon, Addenda, Journal of the American Oriental Society, (1993) pg.593). These Indians were in Egypt writing messages in their own language, around the time we see a switch from Egyptian hieroglyphics to the Meroitic writing system.
The evidence that the Classical references to an Indian-Meroite King who conquered the Scythians is supported by the Indian literature, provides external corroboration of the tradition that some of the Meroites were of Indian origin. The presence of Indians traders and settlers in Meroe (and Egypt), makes it almost impossible to deny the possibility that Indians, familiar with the Tokharian trade language did not introduce this writing to the Meroites who needed a neutral language to unify the diverse ethnic groups who made up the Meroite state. In relation to the history of linguistic change and bilingualism, it is a mistake to believe that linguistic transfer had to take place for the Meroites to have used Tokharian, when it did not take place when they wrote in Egyptian hieroglyphics.
In summary the classical literature makes it clear that there was a connection between the Gymnosophists (of Meroe) and the Indians. The fact that historical events mentioned in the classical sources are found in the Indian literature confirm the view that there were Indian-Meroites who could have introduced the Tokharian trade language to the Meroites.
The fact that the Nubians who were part of the "Meroitic state", used hieroglyphics and Coptic to write their language without abandoning their native language support the view that they could have also used Tokharian to write Meroitic. And that eventhough they wrote Meroitic inscriptions in Tokharian, they would not have had to abandon Nubian.
The evidence presented above provides internal and external validity for my theory based upon the sources I have cited previously. The sources I have used are impartial, to disconfirm my hypothesis someone needs to show that my propositions are not fully informed [i.e., there were no Indians North Africa and Kush when the Classical writers maintained they were] and present rival explanations based on the evidence. The fact that the claims made by the Classical writers is supported by the Indians themselves if further strong confirmation of the Kushana hypothesis.
The hypothesis based on the classical literature, was enough to support the original Kushana Hypothesis. The predicting power of the original theory, matches the observed natural phenomena which was confirmed elsewhere by cognate place names, ethononyms, lexical items and grammatical features, indicate that my theory has not be falsified.
The ability to reliably predict a linguistic relationship between Kushana and Meroitic, was further confirmation of the Kushana Hypothesis, because the linguistic connections were deducible from prediction.
I controlled the Kushana Hypothesis by comparing the statements of the classical writers, with historical, linguistic anthropological and toponymic evidence found not only in Africa, but also India and Central Asia [where the people also used Tokharian as a trade language to unify the various people in Central Asia]. I constructed five testable hypotheses in support of the Kushana theory, and it seems only fair that these five variables must be disconfirmed, to falsify the Kushana Hypothesis. Failure to disconfirm this theorem, implies validity of my prediction.
My confirmation of the above five variables: the presence of Kushites in Africa and Asia; the presence of Kushana sages in India who may have migrated to Meroe; cognate lexical items; cognate verbs and cognate grammatical features indicates systematic controlled, critical and empirical investigation of the question of Kushana representing the Meroitic cognate language.
First, I would like to make it clear that the probable language of the Kushana was Tamil.. According to Dravidian literature, the Kushana were called Kosars=Yakshas=Yueh chih/ Kushana. This literature maintains that when they entered India they either already spoke Tamil, or adopted the language upon settlement in India.
The Kushana and the Yueh chih were one and the same. In addition to North Indian documents the Kushana-Yueh chih association are also discussed in Dravidian literature. V Kanakasabhai, The Tamils Eighteen hundred years ago, note that in the Sanskrit literature the Yueh chih were called Yakshas, Pali chroniclers called them Yakkos and Kosars< Kushana.
They allegedely arrived in India during the 2nd century BC. He makes it clear that the Yueh chih/ Kushana as noted on their coins worshipped Siva as seen on the coins of Kanishka. This is why we have a coin of a Kushana king from Taxila, dated to AD 76 that declares that the king was maharaja rajatiraja devaputra Kushana "Great King, King of kings, Son of God, the Kushana".
Kushana
King Kaniska of the Kushan
The term Tochara has nothing to do with the Yueh chih, this was a term used to describe the people who took over the Greek Bactrian state, before the Kushana reached the Oxus Valley around 150 BC . There is no reason the Kushana may not have been intimately familiar with the Kharosthi writing at this time because from 202BC onward Prakrit and Chinese documents were written in Kharosthi.
The Kushana and the Yueh chih were one and the same. In addition to North Indian documents the Kushana-Yueh chih association are also discussed in Dravidian literature.V Kanakasabhai, The Tamils Eighteen hundred years ago note that in the Sanskrit literature the Yueh chih were called Yakshas, Pali chroniclers called them Yakkos and Kosars< Kushana. They allegedely arrived in India during the 2nd century BC. He makes it clear that the Yueh chih/ Kushana as noted on their coins worshipped Siva as seen on the coins of Kanishka.This is why we have a coin of a Kushana king from Taxila, dated to AD 76 that declares that the king was maharaja rajatiraja devaputra Kushana "Great King, King of kings, Son of God, the Kushana".
Some researchers believe that the Ars'i spoke Tocharian A, while Tocharian B was the "Kucha language" may have been spoken by the Kushana people. I don't know where you read that the speakers of Tocharian A were called Ars'i. This names have nothing to do with ethnic groups, they refer to the cities where Tocharian text were found: Tocharian A documents were found around Qarashar and Turfan, thusly these text are also referred to as Turfanian or East Tocharian; Tocharian B documents were found near the town of Kucha, thusly they are sometimes called Kuchean or West Tocharian.
Kanishka Casket
Linguist use the term Tochari to refer to these people, because they were given this title in Turkic manuscripts . They called themselves Kushana.
The observable evidence make it clear that the terms used to label the Tocharian dialects are not ethnonyms, they are terms used to denote where the Tocharian records were found. The use of the term Ars'i does not relate to the Kushana people. The terms: Asii, Pasiani, Tochari and Sacarauli, refer to the nomads that took away Bactria from the Greeks.
These nomads came from the Iaxartes River that adjoins that of Sacae and the Sogdiani .The Kushana people took over Bactria much later. It is a mistake to believe that Ars'i and Kucha were ethnonyms is under-standable given your lack of knowledge about Tocharian. And I will agree that there were a number of different languages spoken by people who wrote material in Tocharian. It is for this reason that I have maintained throughout my published works on Tocharian, that this was a trade language. This language was used by the Central Asians as a lingua franca and trade language due to the numerous ethnic groups which formerly lived in central Asia". Kharosthi was long used to write in Central Asia. It was even used by the Greeks. The use of the Kharosthi writing system in Central Asia and India, would place this writing contemporaneous with the tradition, recorded by the Classical writers of Indians settling among the Kushites of Meroitic Empire..
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: We have two forms of evidence for Meroites using Kharosthi script in the Meroitic Empire. Firstly, the evidence of the correspondence between Meroitic and Kharosthi signs.
The chart above makes it clear that the following Meroitic and Kharosthi signs agree in shape and sound:
B
M
T
E
To
Te
H
The second source of evidence is the ability to read every Meroitic inscription using Kushana words. For example: [/IMG] Below I will first give the transliteration of the Karanog stelae and then a translation of Meroitic into English. At the end of the translation we will provide a vocabulary of the text.
Line 1. Woshi ne Shore yi-ne t-po m-i d.
Line 2. Tqowine s li-ne t si d e-ne te o d he.
Line 3. Lo wi-ne sl h m-ne...s-ne qo. Qo li-ne
Line 4. Terike lo wi-ne...i l pe rine si b lo.
Line 5. Tel-o wi-ne pq r ne ye mtetl...e ne ye.
Line 6. Lq-ne lo win-ne yet sn net e i ol ye e-ne.
Line 7. M ne lo wi-ne... ot p kr-ne yet ne-ne e-o wi-ne.
Line 8. Pe sto lt-ne yet m n e e-o wi-ne qo re.
Line 9. St s t lete-ne s-ne tq lo wi-ne hle mr.
Line 10. S-ne q lo-t to lo wi-ne mte h ne s-n pe.
Line 11. Sto li h wi-ne t e lo lo-a en-ne ye.
Line 12. Tb h re lo wi-ne ato mh enep si se-a.
Line 13. Te-ne ato mh enep wi h r ke te-ne h ml-o l-ne.
Line 14. P-Sin ote m-i ke te-ne Wosi ne. Shore o-i ine.
TRANSLATION
"(l). Isis the Good, and Osiris the Eternal (are) commanding the measure (of) the bequeathal. (2) Tqowine, the patron to transmit her satisfying bequeathal. She commands the beginning of the bequeathal of the He. (3) The solitary honorable patron (is) to behold the He-ne's (the abstract personality of man)...to prop up the renewal. Act to (make) the conveyance. (4) (Its) the Fashion to dispatch Awe...[h]i to remain to reproduce within satisfaction from a distance. (5) The solitary object of respect to make indeed a good voyage to Mtetl...[here] to be give(n) a good existence.(6) She is to witness solitary reverence capable of cleverly bowing in reverence (to the gods)--give leave to the /a grand journey (Oh) Commander. (7) Measure the good (of the ) lonely object of Honor [lying in the grave]...esteem and dignity. Adorn (her with) goodness, give opening to honor.(8) Your nonexistent patron goes to measure goodness. Give (its) beginning Now! The Object of Respect (Tqowine, to be) renewed indeed. (9) Endorse the embarkation of the (good) Supporter. Set in Motion the dispatch of this object of respect (Tqowine) to reverberate luck. (10) The patron, she is present (in) the grave. Send the Object of Respect to unlock H-ne [the place where the H, is kept]--the Patron begs you. (11) Protect her conveyance of the H. This honorable woman give (her) isolated departure. The Teacher (to take) a journey. (12) Announce in a lofty voice indeed, the dispatch of this Object of Respect (on the) path (of) the grand bestowal (of) atonement (and ) favor. (13) Rebirth is the path to grand bestowal of honor to the H , indeed give permission for the rebirth of the H, and the soul to exit. (14) Much satisfaction (and) wonder (to come) measure it. The permission (for its bestowal ) is arranged by Isis,( and) Osiris (is) the Opener of the Way."
This is a faulty statement firstly because I have already shown that the two writing systems share signs.
False.
quote:Clyde Winters:
The French and English analogy does not apply to this situation.
The French-English analogy was just that, to drive home a point [that was lost you], whereby English was fully understood, where as French wasn't. It doesn't pertain to specific individual.
quote:Clyde Winters:
I have studied African languages and Kushana and can tell the difference between the two.
According to you, Meroitic is unrelated to any African languages, and yet related to Niger-congo, and so...
quote:Clyde Winters:
It does not apply because I can read French and English and would immediately tell the difference between the two language.
See second post to the top.
quote:Clyde Winters:
For example,if you tried to translate a French document using English you would not be able to comprehend the text so you would know right away the French text was not written in the English language.
Precisely the point made in the 'French-English' analogy. However, you are trying to 'convince' us that you can pull off the *opposite* in two different languages, which are by far more scripturally distinct from one other than French is to English. So then, you're playing 'slow' when you pretended not to get the point, huh?
quote:Clyde Winters:
The same thing would occur if I tried to read a Meroitic document in Kushana.
Exactly.
quote:Clyde Winters:
If the words were not cognate to Kushana words I would not be able to read Meroitic documents. But this is not the case you can read these documents using Kushana.
ROTFL. You just admitted to Meroitic [African] and "Kushana" [Indo-European] being two different languages, only to reverse it to the two being cognates.
^In the manner with which you proclaim to translate Meroitic, you might as well just say that Meroitic was actually "Kushana"; period! But you and I both know that this is just hot air, don't we?...otherwise the very *least* you would have answered, is the request on the whereabouts of Meroitic text translations into Kharosthi script, side-by-side Meroitic in Sudan.
Ps - In fact, if the two were basically the same languages, as your so-called 'full' Meroitic translations suggest, Meroitic should have simply been written in Kharosthi, rather than Meroitic script.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
This is a faulty statement firstly because I have already shown that the two writing systems share signs.
Recap: Even your own pictorial example show Meroitic to have distinct alphabets from Kharosthi. Arbitrary similarity of one or two signs, presumably the lowercase 'z'-like sign at bottom of the table [10th line from top] and perhas the reversed 'n'-looking figure near the top [fifth line from top]. By comparison, it is very much closer to Demotic, and then "Egyptian". If your translation isn't the 'faulty' element here, then why did you not use these much closer examples, in lieu of Kharosthi?
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
ROTFL. You just admitted to Meroitic [African] and "Kushana" [Indo-European] being two different languages, only to reverse it to the two being cognates.
^In the manner with which you proclaim to translate Meroitic, you might as well just say that Meroitic was actually "Kushana"; period! But you and I both know that this is just hot air, don't we?...otherwise the very *least* you would have answered, is the request on the whereabouts of Meroitic text translations into Kharosthi script, side-by-side Meroitic in Sudan.
Ps - In fact, if the two were basically the same languages, as your so-called 'full' Meroitic translations suggest, Meroitic should have simply been written in Kharosthi, rather than Meroitic script.
Just because one language is cognate to another language does not make the languages the same language. For example, Coptic is the cognate language of Egyptian, but Egyptian is not the Coptic language.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
This is a faulty statement firstly because I have already shown that the two writing systems share signs.
Recap: Even your own pictorial example show Meroitic to have distinct alphabets from Kharosthi. Arbitrary similarity of one or two signs, presumably the lowercase 'z'-like sign at bottom of the table [10th line from top] and perhas the reversed 'n'-looking figure near the top [fifth line from top]. By comparison, it is very much closer to Demotic, and then "Egyptian". If your translation isn't the 'faulty' element here, then why did you not use these much closer examples, in lieu of Kharosthi?
Even this table from Clyde is misleading:
Because a broader look at the alphabets show them to be quite distinct...
ROTFL. You just admitted to Meroitic [African] and "Kushana" [Indo-European] being two different languages, only to reverse it to the two being cognates.
^In the manner with which you proclaim to translate Meroitic, you might as well just say that Meroitic was actually "Kushana"; period! But you and I both know that this is just hot air, don't we?...otherwise the very *least* you would have answered, is the request on the whereabouts of Meroitic text translations into Kharosthi script, side-by-side Meroitic in Sudan.
Ps - In fact, if the two were basically the same languages, as your so-called 'full' Meroitic translations suggest, Meroitic should have simply been written in Kharosthi, rather than Meroitic script.
Just because one language is cognate to another language does not make the languages the same language. For example, Coptic is the cognate language of Egyptian, but Egyptian is not the Coptic language.
You haven't demonstrated the cognative relationship between Kharosthi and Meroitic, as vindicated by your incapacity to answer Kharosth's whereabouts in Sudan.
*Coptic and Egyptic are both Egyptian, with the former representing by and large, a shift in scripture more so than the language itself.
*Meroitic was a Nile Valley language, hence African. Kharosthi was an Indus Valley language, hence non-African.
*Meroitic is deemed by most linguists to be Nilo-Saharan affiliated, while Kharosthi is affiliated with Indo-European.
Given all this, how can you say that Meroitic is cognate to Kharosthi?
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
This is a faulty statement firstly because I have already shown that the two writing systems share signs.
Recap: Even your own pictorial example show Meroitic to have distinct alphabets from Kharosthi. Arbitrary similarity of one or two signs, presumably the lowercase 'z'-like sign at bottom of the table [10th line from top] and perhas the reversed 'n'-looking figure near the top [fifth line from top]. By comparison, it is very much closer to Demotic, and then "Egyptian". If your translation isn't the 'faulty' element here, then why did you not use these much closer examples, in lieu of Kharosthi?
Even this table from Clyde is misleading:
Because a broader look at the alphabets show them to be quite distinct...
Comparing alphabets side by side:
Meroitic Script [top] and Kharosthi [bottom]
Meroitic:
Kharosthi:
Meroitic:
Kharosthi:
The signs you have have published are not the full corpus of Kharosthi and Meroitic signs. This is only one varient of the signs, there are many more.
The chart below shows the cognate Meroitic and Kharosthi signs.
ROTFL. You just admitted to Meroitic [African] and "Kushana" [Indo-European] being two different languages, only to reverse it to the two being cognates.
^In the manner with which you proclaim to translate Meroitic, you might as well just say that Meroitic was actually "Kushana"; period! But you and I both know that this is just hot air, don't we?...otherwise the very *least* you would have answered, is the request on the whereabouts of Meroitic text translations into Kharosthi script, side-by-side Meroitic in Sudan.
Ps - In fact, if the two were basically the same languages, as your so-called 'full' Meroitic translations suggest, Meroitic should have simply been written in Kharosthi, rather than Meroitic script.
Just because one language is cognate to another language does not make the languages the same language. For example, Coptic is the cognate language of Egyptian, but Egyptian is not the Coptic language.
You haven't demonstrated the cognative relationship between Kharosthi and Meroitic, as vindicated by your incapacity to answer Kharosth's whereabouts in Sudan.
*Coptic and Egyptic are both Egyptian, with the former representing by and large, a shift in scripture more so than the language itself.
*Meroitic was a Nile Valley language, hence African. Kharosthi was an Indus Valley language, hence non-African.
*Meroitic is deemed by most linguists to be Nilo-Saharan affiliated, while Kharosthi is affiliated with Indo-European.
Given all this, how can you say that Meroitic is cognate to Kharosthi?
I have already explained above why Kushana is the cognate language to Meroitic. Kharosthi is not a language it is a system of writing like our alphabet. I maintain that the Khraosthi and Meroitic writing systems share signs with similar shape and meaning.
quote:
The chart above makes it clear that the following Meroitic and Kharosthi signs agree in shape and sound:
B
M
T
E
To
Te
H
Except for Rilly what other linguist has been able to use linguistic data to claim that Meroitic is a Nilo-Saharan language.
Finally, your reasoning that Coptic is Egyptian is faulty. For example,we know that English is a Germanic language, but we can agree that German and English are two different languages. If Egyptian was the same as Coptic, it would be called Coptic instead of Egyptian.
The signs you have have published are not the full corpus of Kharosthi and Meroitic signs. This is only one varient of the signs, there are many more.
The chart below shows the cognate Meroitic and Kharosthi signs.
My posts show a broad look at basic respective alphabets of Meroitic and Kharosthi consistently posted virtually everywhere, and they 'encompass' the very English-letter equivalents that you proclaim to be showing in your table. These compilations are certainly much broader than your 'table'. Yet, the broad look at these alphabets demonstrate just how strikingly distinct the two scripts are; certainly, sharply distinctive enough to demonstrate how ludicrous it would be to write Meroitic in Kharosthi script, and thereby proclaim to be translating Meroitic using the script.
BTW, where is your 'non-Clyde' affiliated direct citations [~ two or more] showing the additional letters, quite different from the above presentations of mine...along with the said ones I presented? In other words, the "corpus of Kharosthi and Meroitic signs."
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:MysterySolver wrote: ROTFL. You just admitted to Meroitic [African] and "Kushana" [Indo-European] being two different languages, only to reverse it to the two being cognates.
This particular flip-flop answers and important question about Winters phony methods.
He often uses the expression "one and the same".
In other words two different languages are the same.
Thus, Winters "deciphered" Olmec because it was "the same", as West African Mandingo.
Dr. Winters "deciphered" Meroitic because it was "the same" as Indo-European Kushana, and so on.
Let's keep the fun going by asking a general question for the lurkers...
Is there anyone out there who, after this conversation....still believes Dr. Winters has -deciphered- these langauges?
Is there anyone who does not understand why these languages are still considered undiciphered in spite of Winters proclaimed 'breakthroughs', which are generally ignored in the scholarly community? [from Obenga to Ehret]
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Rasol: Agreed and will add, some many not have caught on to the fact that Winters discourse is - ego driven - not finally, so much Afrocentric as Ego-centric.
If Winters students will listen with alert minds they will see that what Winters is *asserting* is not the glory of Africa, but mere self-glorification.
quote:Winters: This is your opinion founded on jealousy.
^ Actually, your comment itself meets the following definition.
megalomania - delusions of great [accomplishment] buttressed by paranoid accusations of being underappreciated by the masses, and or undermined by the powerful.
Yes Dr. Winters, we're all just jealous of you.
Now, calm down, and take your meds please. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
I have already explained above why Kushana is the cognate language to Meroitic.
Nope, as demonstrated by both lack of lexical correspondence & failure to answer about Kharosthi whereabouts in Sudan.
quote:Clyde Winters:
Kharosthi is not a language it is a system of writing like our alphabet.
Yeah right, writings don't communicate language. And yet, remarkably, you're supposedly translating a language through a system of writing devoid of language, i.e without meanings.
quote:Clyde Winters:
I maintain that the Khraosthi and Meroitic writing systems share signs with similar shape and meaning.
...thereby maintaining its fallacy. I concur.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:1. Classical evidence that Indians influenced the Meroitic civilization after the death of their king.
pseudo-science rely on ancient myths and legends rather than on objective-physical evidence.
quote:2. Jaina textual evidence that an Indian group left their homeland after their king was killed supporting the statements of Classical writers.
Non-sequitur - you need Kushana texts in Sudan, which you don't have, and or Indian DNA in Sudan...which you also don't have.
quote:3. Archaeological evidence of Indian communities in Egypt and Ethiopia (supported by textual evidence) that they were in close proximity to the Meroitic Empire and could have easily made their way to the the Empire.
Non-sequitur # 2 - there are no Kushana archeology sites in Meroe - which is what you need, but don't have.
quote:4.Cognate signs from Kharosthi that relate to Meroitic symbols.
Tautology. There is no proof that Meroitic and Kharosthi symbols are of a common lineage [ie- cognate]. The non evidence you spam purports to show similarities in symbol designs, as might be found between unrelated languages.
quote: 5. Cognate Meroitic and Kushana, lexical items, grammar and verbs that agree with findings of other researchers.
Wishful thinking. For the most part your findings are in disagreement with the majority of other scholars.
quote:6. Cognate Sudan and Central Asian toponyms.
Tautology - see above. claiming is not proving.
quote:7. Finally, my decipherment allows any researcher to read all the Meroitic inscriptions .
Kharosthi is not a language it is a system of writing like our alphabet.
Yeah right, writings don't communicate language. And yet, remarkably, you're supposedly translating a language through a system of writing devoid of language, i.e without meanings.
It would appear that the further this conversation goes, the more Clyde is forced to say things that progressively get dumber. No doubt, the result of merciless but sound total obliteration of his propositions.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
The signs you have have published are not the full corpus of Kharosthi and Meroitic signs. This is only one varient of the signs, there are many more.
The chart below shows the cognate Meroitic and Kharosthi signs.
My posts show a broad look at basic respective alphabets of Meroitic and Kharosthi consistently posted virtually everywhere, and they 'encompass' the very English-letter equivalents that you proclaim to be showing in your table. These compilations are certainly much broader than your 'table'. Yet, the broad look at these alphabets demonstrate just how strikingly distinct the two scripts are; certainly, sharply distinctive enough to demonstrate how ludicrous it would be to write Meroitic in Kharosthi script, and thereby proclaim to be translating Meroitic using the script.
BTW, where is your 'non-Clyde' affiliated direct citations [~ two or more] showing the additional letters, quite different from the above presentations of mine...along with the said ones I presented? In other words, the "corpus of Kharosthi and Meroitic signs."
They are found in any reference book at your local library on Kharosthi.
posted
^ I understand the distinction between writing systems Kharosthi and the languages they communicate.
But neither Kharosthi nor Kushana are found in Sudan, so Winters really can't make any point, or go anywhere with this thead....hot airs notwithstanding.
Conclusion:
There is no evidence of IndoEuropean speaking Asians having anything to do with African Meroitic.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
I have already explained above why Kushana is the cognate language to Meroitic.
Nope, as demonstrated by both lack of lexical correspondence & failure to answer about Kharosthi whereabouts in Sudan.
quote:Clyde Winters:
Kharosthi is not a language it is a system of writing like our alphabet.
Yeah right, writings don't communicate language. And yet, remarkably, you're supposedly translating a language through a system of writing devoid of language, i.e without meanings.
You are right a writing system does communicate language. But language is not a writing system.
For example, here I will write the following Swahili sentence Nina Sema Kiswahili. The letters belong to our alphabet, but clearly the language is Swahili. I could also write the same sentence in Arabic letters. The letters would be different but the language would remain Swahili The system of writing only serves as a vehicle to convey the sounds of the language.
posted
This shows that I am talking to a fool. I will not comment any more of your post until you answer some questions or make some sense in what you are writing.
My comments are based on evidence I expect the same from you.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:.Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [qb] The Kushana hypothesis was based on the following evidence, 1) no African language has been found to be a cognate language of Meroitic 2) the Classical literature says that the Kushites lived in Asia and Africa; 3) the Gymnosophists, or "naked sages" of Meroe came from India.
Before I began work on Meroitic, other researchers had already falsified the African theory for Meroitic's cognate language.
The comparative method was used to find the cognate language of Meroitic. Using this method Meroitic scholars have compared the "known" Meroitic terms to vernacular African languages to establish morphological cognition between Meroitic and an African language. Up to now these linguistic comparisons failed to reveal the cognate language of Meroitic.
Researchers working on the Meroitic language do not believe that it was a member of the Afro-Asian group. Griffith and Haycock tried to read Meroitic using Nubian.
K.H. Priese, tried to read the Meroitic text using Eastern Sudani; and F. Hintze, attempted to compare Meroitic with the Ural-Altaic group. Siegbert Hummel, compared the "known" Meroitic words to words in the Altaic family which he believed was a substrate language of Meroitic. The fact that not even Nubian, a language spoken by a people who live today in the former Meroitic empire, failed to be the cognate language of Meroitic made it clear that we must look elsewhere for the cognate language spoken by the Meroites.
Flavius Philostratus, the writer of the Vita Apollonii, Vol. 1,cliamed that the Gymnosophists of Meroe originally came from India (see F.C. Conybeare, Philostratus:The Life of Apollonius of Tyana (p.45),1950). Given the fact that the Kushana had formerly ruled India around the time that the Meroitic writing was introduced to the Kushite civilization, lead to the hypothesis that the ancestors of the Gymnosophist may have been Kushana philosophers.
The historical evidence of the Kushana having ruled India made the Classical references to Indians in Meroe, an important source for the construction of alternative theories about the possible location of the cognate language of Meroitic.
There is external evidence, which supports my theory. A theory explains observed phenomena and has predictive power. I have theorized that due to the claims of the Classical writers that some of the Meroites came from India (F.C Conybeare (Trans.), Philostratus: The life of Apollonius of Tyana Vol.2, (1950) pg.271). According to the Life of Apollonius, the Indian Meroites were formerly led by a King Ganges, who had "repulsed the Scythians who invaded this land [India from] across the Caucasus" (Conybeare, Vol.1, Pg.273). Pilostratus also made it clear that the Indians of Meroe came to this country after their king was killed.
The presence of this tradition of an Indian King of the Indian-Meroites conquering the Scythians predicts that the Indian literature should record this historical episode. This prediction is supported by a Jaina text called the Kalakeharya-Kathanaka, which reports that when the Scythians invaded Malwa, the King of Malwa, called Vikramaditya defeated the Scythians (H. Kulke & D. Rothermund, History of India (London, Routledge: 1990, pg.73). This king Vikramaditya may be the Ganges mentioned in the Life of Apollonius.Confirmation of the Ganges story, supports the Classical literary evidence that their were Indianized-Meroites that could have introduced the Tokharian trade language to the Meroites.
Moreover, there were other Indians in North Africa in addition to Kush/Meroe. For example, at Quseir al-Qadim there was a large Indian speaking community (see: R. Salomon, "Epigraphic remains of Indian traders in Egypt", Journal of the American oriental Society, (1991) pp.731-736; and R. Salomon, Addenda, Journal of the American Oriental Society, (1993) pg.593). These Indians were in Egypt writing messages in their own language, around the time we see a switch from Egyptian hieroglyphics to the Meroitic writing system.
The evidence that the Classical references to an Indian-Meroite King who conquered the Scythians is supported by the Indian literature, provides external corroboration of the tradition that some of the Meroites were of Indian origin. The presence of Indians traders and settlers in Meroe (and Egypt), makes it almost impossible to deny the possibility that Indians, familiar with the Tokharian trade language did not introduce this writing to the Meroites who needed a neutral language to unify the diverse ethnic groups who made up the Meroite state. In relation to the history of linguistic change and bilingualism, it is a mistake to believe that linguistic transfer had to take place for the Meroites to have used Tokharian, when it did not take place when they wrote in Egyptian hieroglyphics.
In summary the classical literature makes it clear that there was a connection between the Gymnosophists (of Meroe) and the Indians. The fact that historical events mentioned in the classical sources are found in the Indian literature confirm the view that there were Indian-Meroites who could have introduced the Tokharian trade language to the Meroites.
The fact that the Nubians who were part of the "Meroitic state", used hieroglyphics and Coptic to write their language without abandoning their native language support the view that they could have also used Tokharian to write Meroitic. And that eventhough they wrote Meroitic inscriptions in Tokharian, they would not have had to abandon Nubian.
The evidence presented above provides internal and external validity for my theory based upon the sources I have cited previously. The sources I have used are impartial, to disconfirm my hypothesis someone needs to show that my propositions are not fully informed [i.e., there were no Indians North Africa and Kush when the Classical writers maintained they were] and present rival explanations based on the evidence. The fact that the claims made by the Classical writers is supported by the Indians themselves if further strong confirmation of the Kushana hypothesis.
The hypothesis based on the classical literature, was enough to support the original Kushana Hypothesis. The predicting power of the original theory, matches the observed natural phenomena which was confirmed elsewhere by cognate place names, ethononyms, lexical items and grammatical features, indicate that my theory has not be falsified.
The ability to reliably predict a linguistic relationship between Kushana and Meroitic, was further confirmation of the Kushana Hypothesis, because the linguistic connections were deducible from prediction.
I controlled the Kushana Hypothesis by comparing the statements of the classical writers, with historical, linguistic anthropological and toponymic evidence found not only in Africa, but also India and Central Asia [where the people also used Tokharian as a trade language to unify the various people in Central Asia]. I constructed five testable hypotheses in support of the Kushana theory, and it seems only fair that these five variables must be disconfirmed, to falsify the Kushana Hypothesis. Failure to disconfirm this theorem, implies validity of my prediction.
My confirmation of the above five variables: the presence of Kushites in Africa and Asia; the presence of Kushana sages in India who may have migrated to Meroe; cognate lexical items; cognate verbs and cognate grammatical features indicates systematic controlled, critical and empirical investigation of the question of Kushana representing the Meroitic cognate language.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: [QUOTE]1. Classical evidence that Indians influenced the Meroitic civilization after the death of their king.
pseudo-science rely on ancient myths and legends rather than on objective-physical evidence.
quote:2. Jaina textual evidence that an Indian group left their homeland after their king was killed supporting the statements of Classical writers.
Non-sequitur - you need Kushana texts in Sudan, which you don't have, and or Indian DNA in Sudan...which you also don't have.
quote:3. Archaeological evidence of Indian communities in Egypt and Ethiopia (supported by textual evidence) that they were in close proximity to the Meroitic Empire and could have easily made their way to the the Empire.
Non-sequitur # 2 - there are no Kushana archeology sites in Meroe - which is what you need, but don't have.
quote:4.Cognate signs from Kharosthi that relate to Meroitic symbols.
Tautology. There is no proof that Meroitic and Kharosthi symbols are of a common lineage [ie- cognate]. The non evidence you spam purports to show similarities in symbol designs, as might be found between unrelated languages.
quote: 5. Cognate Meroitic and Kushana, lexical items, grammar and verbs that agree with findings of other researchers.
Wishful thinking. For the most part your findings are in disagreement with the majority of other scholars.
quote:6. Cognate Sudan and Central Asian toponyms.
Tautology - see above. claiming is not proving.
quote:7. Finally, my decipherment allows any researcher to read all the Meroitic inscriptions .
I have already explained above why Kushana is the cognate language to Meroitic.
Nope, as demonstrated by both lack of lexical correspondence & failure to answer about Kharosthi whereabouts in Sudan.
quote:Clyde Winters:
Kharosthi is not a language it is a system of writing like our alphabet.
Yeah right, writings don't communicate language. And yet, remarkably, you're supposedly translating a language through a system of writing devoid of language, i.e without meanings.
You are right a writing system does communicate language. But language is not a writing system.
Then, stop playing 'mentally slow'. You know what we mean, when we refer to your so-called translations using Kharosthi.
If there were no meanings attached to your Kharosthi "translations", then why not simply use the pre-existing Meroitic 'system of writing'? Lol.
What you're trying to 'convince' us of, is that you don't understand Meroitic language using Meroe's own 'system of writing', but rather a far-off place's 'system of writing' without any language attached to it.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:My posts show a broad look at basic respective alphabets of Meroitic and Kharosthi consistently posted virtually everywhere, and they 'encompass' the very English-letter equivalents that you proclaim to be showing in your table. These compilations are certainly much broader than your 'table'. Yet, the broad look at these alphabets demonstrate just how strikingly distinct the two scripts are; certainly, sharply distinctive enough to demonstrate how ludicrous it would be to write Meroitic in Kharosthi script, and thereby proclaim to be translating Meroitic using the script.
BTW, where is your 'non-Clyde' affiliated direct citations [~ two or more] showing the additional letters, quite different from the above presentations of mine...along with the said ones I presented? In other words, the "corpus of Kharosthi and Meroitic signs."
They are found in any reference book at your local library on Kharosthi.
Copout. The burden is on you to directly cite non-Clyde affiliated "full" corpus of the said alphabets, broader than what I presented, but also including the ones presented therein. Otherwise, your post is just another smokescreen to hide the apparent: that the two scripts are strikingly distinct.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
I have already explained above why Kushana is the cognate language to Meroitic.
Nope, as demonstrated by both lack of lexical correspondence & failure to answer about Kharosthi whereabouts in Sudan.
quote:Clyde Winters:
Kharosthi is not a language it is a system of writing like our alphabet.
Yeah right, writings don't communicate language. And yet, remarkably, you're supposedly translating a language through a system of writing devoid of language, i.e without meanings.
You are right a writing system does communicate language. But language is not a writing system.
Then, stop playing 'mentally slow'. You know what we mean, when we refer to your so-called translations using Kharosthi.
If there were no meanings attached to your Kharosthi "translations", then why not simply use the pre-existing Meroitic 'system of writing'? Lol.
What you're trying to 'convince' us of, is that you don't understand Meroitic language using Meroe's own 'system of writing', but rather a far-off place's 'system of writing' without any language attached to it.
It is you that lacks understanding and illustrate "slowness" .I will try to break it down to you again.
I use the sounds of Meroitic writing system to find Meroitic words. The Meroitic writing system as explained above, is a combination of Demotic and Kharosthi signs. To read the Meroitic text I use cognates from the Kushana language to read the Meroitic words.
quote:My posts show a broad look at basic respective alphabets of Meroitic and Kharosthi consistently posted virtually everywhere, and they 'encompass' the very English-letter equivalents that you proclaim to be showing in your table. These compilations are certainly much broader than your 'table'. Yet, the broad look at these alphabets demonstrate just how strikingly distinct the two scripts are; certainly, sharply distinctive enough to demonstrate how ludicrous it would be to write Meroitic in Kharosthi script, and thereby proclaim to be translating Meroitic using the script.
BTW, where is your 'non-Clyde' affiliated direct citations [~ two or more] showing the additional letters, quite different from the above presentations of mine...along with the said ones I presented? In other words, the "corpus of Kharosthi and Meroitic signs."
They are found in any reference book at your local library on Kharosthi.
Copout. The burden is on you to directly cite non-Clyde affiliated "full" corpus of the said alphabets, broader than what I presented, but also including the ones presented therein. Otherwise, your post is just another smokescreen to hide the apparent: that the two scripts are strikingly distinct.
I will not cite any sources on Kharosthi writing until you provide sources from linguistic journals where researchers have used prototerms to decipher a dead language; and the presence of Nubian speakers in the Meroitic Empire.
It is you that lacks understanding and illustrate "slowness".
...with you being the frontrunner in that respect.
quote:Clyde Winters:
I will try to break it down to you again.
Are you sure you want do that? I mean, you're slow enough as it is. You can't possibly get slower, or can you.
quote:Clyde Winters:
I use the sounds of Meroitic writing system to find Meroitic words.
Then why not stick to Meroitic 'writing system', with a full set of its own alphabets. Why do you need to far-off locations to get 'systems of writing' devoid of meaning?
quote:Clyde Winters:
The Meroitic writing system as explained above, is a combination of Demotic and Kharosthi signs.
Hasn't been explained how Meroitic adopted Kharosthi signs, which first of all lack correspondence, as I've demonstrated, and which too, interestingly appear in Demotic.
quote:Clyde Winters:
To read the Meroitic text I use cognates from the Kushana language to read the Meroitic words.
How can you use Meroitic, Nilo-Saharan (African), and Kushana, Indo-European, to produce cognates of basic lexicons? Meroitic isn't Kushana.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Then why not stick to Meroitic 'writing system', with a full set of its own alphabets. Why do you need to far-off locations to get 'systems of writing' devoid of meaning?
Again you betry your slowness. A writing system only conveys the sounds of the language. The meaning results from reading the words. Using the Kushana language you can read any Meroitic text.
[/IMG] Below I will first give the transliteration of the Karanog stelae and then a translation of Meroitic into English. At the end of the translation we will provide a vocabulary of the text.
Line 1. Woshi ne Shore yi-ne t-po m-i d.
Line 2. Tqowine s li-ne t si d e-ne te o d he.
Line 3. Lo wi-ne sl h m-ne...s-ne qo. Qo li-ne
Line 4. Terike lo wi-ne...i l pe rine si b lo.
Line 5. Tel-o wi-ne pq r ne ye mtetl...e ne ye.
Line 6. Lq-ne lo win-ne yet sn net e i ol ye e-ne.
Line 7. M ne lo wi-ne... ot p kr-ne yet ne-ne e-o wi-ne.
Line 8. Pe sto lt-ne yet m n e e-o wi-ne qo re.
Line 9. St s t lete-ne s-ne tq lo wi-ne hle mr.
Line 10. S-ne q lo-t to lo wi-ne mte h ne s-n pe.
Line 11. Sto li h wi-ne t e lo lo-a en-ne ye.
Line 12. Tb h re lo wi-ne ato mh enep si se-a.
Line 13. Te-ne ato mh enep wi h r ke te-ne h ml-o l-ne.
Line 14. P-Sin ote m-i ke te-ne Wosi ne. Shore o-i ine.
TRANSLATION
"(l). Isis the Good, and Osiris the Eternal (are) commanding the measure (of) the bequeathal. (2) Tqowine, the patron to transmit her satisfying bequeathal. She commands the beginning of the bequeathal of the He. (3) The solitary honorable patron (is) to behold the He-ne's (the abstract personality of man)...to prop up the renewal. Act to (make) the conveyance. (4) (Its) the Fashion to dispatch Awe...[h]i to remain to reproduce within satisfaction from a distance. (5) The solitary object of respect to make indeed a good voyage to Mtetl...[here] to be give(n) a good existence.(6) She is to witness solitary reverence capable of cleverly bowing in reverence (to the gods)--give leave to the /a grand journey (Oh) Commander. (7) Measure the good (of the ) lonely object of Honor [lying in the grave]...esteem and dignity. Adorn (her with) goodness, give opening to honor.(8) Your nonexistent patron goes to measure goodness. Give (its) beginning Now! The Object of Respect (Tqowine, to be) renewed indeed. (9) Endorse the embarkation of the (good) Supporter. Set in Motion the dispatch of this object of respect (Tqowine) to reverberate luck. (10) The patron, she is present (in) the grave. Send the Object of Respect to unlock H-ne [the place where the H, is kept]--the Patron begs you. (11) Protect her conveyance of the H. This honorable woman give (her) isolated departure. The Teacher (to take) a journey. (12) Announce in a lofty voice indeed, the dispatch of this Object of Respect (on the) path (of) the grand bestowal (of) atonement (and ) favor. (13) Rebirth is the path to grand bestowal of honor to the H , indeed give permission for the rebirth of the H, and the soul to exit. (14) Much satisfaction (and) wonder (to come) measure it. The permission (for its bestowal ) is arranged by Isis,( and) Osiris (is) the Opener of the Way."
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
I will not cite any sources on Kharosthi writing until you provide sources from linguistic journals.
Then the matter is settled; your claim is baseless.
No, your laziness is made evident. You don't have any linguistic references to support your defense of Rilly so you have decided to close the matter since your support is groundless.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: This shows that I am talking to a fool.
Ok.
Apparently I'm the same order of fool as Obenga and everyone else who do not think your hypothesis is sound.
quote: I will not comment any more of your post until you answer some questions
I answered all your questions that were -relevant- to my comments.
However you have not answered -any- of mine.
Most of your questions pertained to MysterySolver comments and, in my opinion MysterySolver answered them, but that's irrelevant to anything I stated.
quote:My comments are based on evidence I expect the same from you.
I disagree. You have no evidence for anything.
And my response to you was quite specific.
Evidence would be ->
1) Kushana [Indo-European] writings in Sudan.
2) Kushana archeology sites in Sudan.
3) Kushana [Asian] genetic lineages in Sudan.
You are simply upset with me, because I ignore your non-sequiturs, tautologies and the other nonsense you use to confuse your fan base [which has been amusingly SILENT while you've taken your beating from Mystery Solver - who appears to have a better understanding of your profession, than you do -> linguist].
As for the rest of your response, it's best classified as poor literature, off point distraction, and fairy tale, and *not* scholarship, as denoted earlier.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
[/IMG] 
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic