The Mande/Olmec Mojarra Stela
Clyde A. Winters
Some of the participants in this ng have requested that I publish a
decipherment of the Mojarra Stela. The main text of this stela is too large to
post on this ng.
But to demonstrate my decipherment of "epi-Olmec" I will decipher the newly
discovered column of this text published in July 1997. The new Mojarra
inscriptions were published by J. S. Justeson and Terrence Kaufman, "A newly
discovered column in the Hieroglyphic text on La Mojarra stela 1: A test of the
epi-Olmec Decipherment", Science, 277 (11 July 1997) pp.207-210. In this article
Justeson and Kaufman, claim that decipherment of this text proves their
decipherment of epi-Olmec using Mije-Sokean.
They claim that the text reads as follows:
" Behold, there/he was for 12 years a [title]
And then a garment got folded
He [uttered]
--the stones thathe set in order were thus symbols,?kingly ones
What I chopped has been planted and harvested well
(A) shape-shifter(s) appeared divinely in his body(p.208)".
These new inscriptions come from a badly weathered and eroded hieroglyphic
column. They were found in November 1995 on the side of Stela 1 from La Mojarra a
riverine site in southern Veracruz.
The personages recorded in the Mojarra and Tuxtla statuette are not the same.
A Governor Tutu is recorded in the Tuxtla statuette. The text of the Mojarra
Stela is about a King Yo Pe.
The Mojarra inscriptions are compound Olmec signs. Compound Olmec signs are
signs which are made up of more than one syllabic sign.
We read the signs in this text from top to bottom, outside inside. For
example, the first Olmec sign reading text B from top to bottom is made up of
three signs. The box figure means Po, the three vertical lines inside the box
equal tò or se , and the line separating the three vertical lines is the Olmec
pronoun i. Thus this sign can be read either as Po i tò "Thou Righteous King "
; or Po i se " You have realized purity".
In these inscriptions I have translated the word kyu 'hemiphere drum' as
hemispheric tomb. I have translated kyu/tyu as hemisphere tomb, because although
this term means hemisphere drum today I believe that in Proto-Manding times this
term was used to describe the hemispheric tombs built to entomb Mande kings. This
view is supported by the fact that in many Olmec inscriptions Olmec words for
habitation are often associated with the use of kyu (see lines 13 and 14).
Below is a transliteration of the the 30 "signs" in Column B of the new
Mojarra text.
1. Po i tò
Thou (art a) righteous King.
2. I po su ba su
Thou (art) pure. Offer libations to this unique Ba
3. Se gyo
(of) the Se gyo.
4. Po tu Po/ Po da tu Po
The pure grand refuge is smooth
5. ???????
6. Po ku tu
Pure cleansing this refuge
Po gbe tu tu
The santified King and his refuge
7. Po ni tu fa
The pure principal of life is in possession of this abode
8. Ba su
The Ba is vigorous
9. Pe kyu
Prodigious tomb
10. ??????
11. Yo Pe
King Yo Pe
12. Po i tu
Pure (is) thine refuge
13. Se ni gyo tè to nde
[Yo Pe's] Principal of life to realize no vice
(in this) good abode/habitation on terrain near the water
14. Pe kyu
The prodigious tomb
15. Ni tu la
The soul of the King sleeps
or
Ni gyu la
The soul, and spiritual tranquility (is) established
16. Yo be
The vital spirit (has ) been put to bed
17. Po
(In) Purity
18. Yo ngbe Bi
The soul is pure righteousness of the great ancestor
19. Yo Pe
20. Po su
The pure libation
21. Lu kyu lu kyu
Hold upright this hemispheric tomb.
Hold upright this hemispheric tomb.
22. Be ta gyu
[It] exist in a unique state of spiritual tranquility
23. Po i tu
Pure is thine refuge
24. Yo Pe
25. Po tu
Righteous King
26. Po i ku tu
Thou head the government is pure
27. Ta ki ku gyo ta kye ba gba da
Ta Ki "[This] sacre raising of a star [Yo Pe]
Ku gyo "[is] the summit of righteousness
Ta kye ba "This man [is] great
gba da "[he] glows at this moment
" [Yo Pe] is a raising star. [He is] the summit
of righteousness. This man [Yo Pe] is great. [He]
glows [like a shinning star] at this moment."
28. Da
At this moment
29. Po yo ta fa ta
The pure image of the race and mystic order is full of propriety"
30. Yo Pe
Po yo ta fa ta Yo Pe
"The pure image of the race and mystic order, full of
propriety [is] Yo Pe."
In summary, Justeson and Kaufman's translation of this text using Mije-Sokean
(Zoquean) fails to convey the richness of Olmec prose and the deep love and
respect that the Olmec gave their kings. Whereas these scholars translate the new
inscriptions as follows:
" Behold, there/he was for 12 years a [title]
And then a garment got folded
He [uttered]
-the stones that he set in order were thus symbols,?kingly ones
What I chopped has been planted and harvested well
(A) shape-shifter(s) appeared divinely in his body(p.208)".
This decipherment by Justeson and Kaufman does not prove that the Mojarra stela
is written in Zoquean. The authors translating this inscription admit they still
can not read the entire document using pre-proto-Sokean to interpret the alleged
epi-Olmec logograms. This translation constrast sharply with my decipherment of
the new Mojarra text.
Justeson and Kaufman believe that this long inscription is about "folded
garments" , and a dignitary chopping crops while a "shapeshifter" appears in "his
body". My decipherment, on the otherhand, based on the authentic language of the
Olmecs indicates that the Mojarra Stela was a funerary text, acknowledging the
potent mystical power of the Olmec King Yo Pe.
C.A. Winters
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On 21 Mar 1998 17:18:45 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
Winters) wrote:
> Some of the participants in this ng have requested that I publish a
>decipherment of the Mojarra Stela. The main text of this stela is too large to
>post on this ng.
> But to demonstrate my decipherment of "epi-Olmec" I will decipher the newly
>discovered column of this text published in July 1997. The new Mojarra
>inscriptions were published by J. S. Justeson and Terrence Kaufman, "A newly
>discovered column in the Hieroglyphic text on La Mojarra stela 1: A test of the
>epi-Olmec Decipherment", Science, 277 (11 July 1997) pp.207-210. In this article
>Justeson and Kaufman, claim that decipherment of this text proves their
>decipherment of epi-Olmec using Mije-Sokean.
> They claim that the text reads as follows:
> " Behold, there/he was for 12 years a [title]
> And then a garment got folded
> He [uttered]
> --the stones thathe set in order were thus symbols,?kingly ones
> What I chopped has been planted and harvested well
> (A) shape-shifter(s) appeared divinely in his body(p.208)".
A more detailed account of Justeson and Kaufman's interpretation can
be found at:
http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/justeson.shl
Or, better yet, the PDF version at:
http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/justeson.pdf
Short summary:
#=sign number
T=transliteration
R=reconstrction (Proto-Mije-Soke)
M=morpholological analysis
L=literal translation
F=free translation
NUM=numeral suffix
INC=incompletive aspect suffix
CMP=completive aspect suffix
RES=resultative verbal noun ('having been X-ed', 'X-ed thing')
3rd person subject prefix is zero.
The sign "7" represents a glottal stop.
Ideograms in UPPPER CASE.
# 1 2 3 4 5
T 7i si 12 YEAR ?
R 7is mak=metz-a 7ame7 [TITLE]
M see ten=two-NUM year [title]
L Behold twelve year [title]
F Behold, he was 12 years a [regional overlord?].
# 6a 6b 7a 7b 8a 8b
T ? AND.THEN tu+CLOTH FOLD+pa2
R ? AND.THEN tuku7 ?paks-pa
M ? and.then cloth it/he-fold-INC
L ? and then clothing it folded
F And then a garment got folded [reference to a bloodletting?].
# 9 10
T ? wU
R ["UTTER"]-wU
M he-["utter"]-CMP
L he ["uttered"]
F He uttered:
# 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
T 7i ORDER.STONES je tzU SYMBOL ? TITLE2 wU
R 7i+ne7w=e je7-tzU ?ki7ps-i ? TITLE2-wU7
M his-order.stones yon-MANNER it-?remember-RES ? ?king-RELATIVE
L his-ordered-stones that-way symbol ? ?king-type
F The stones that he set in order were thus symbols, ?kingly ones.
# 19 20a 20b 21 22 23 24
T na tze-tze PLANT 7i wU tuk
R na+tzetz-e nip7-i wU=tuk-i
M my-chop-RES it-plant-RES it-good-harvest-RES
L my-chopped-thing planted-thing well-harvested-thing
F What I chopped {has been planted and harvested well | is a planting
and a good harvest}.
# 25 26 27 28 29 30
T SHAPESHIFTER2 ma sa ni APPEAR wU
R jama masa-ni7-APPEAR-CMP
M shapeshifter it-god-in/on body-appear-CMP
L shapeshifter it-appeared-divinely-in his body
F A shape-shifter appeared divinely in his body.
==
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
m...@wxs.nl |_____________|||
========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
ke...@jps.net
In article <6f0spl$2lm$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>,>.
Thanks, Clyde. Unlike most others in this thread, I will give this
a serious look-see. Do any of the vowels above involve tones?
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On 21 Mar 1998 17:18:45 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
Winters) wrote:
A few questions about the numbering of the signs:
> Below is a transliteration of the the 30 "signs" in Column B of the new
>Mojarra text.
>1. Po i tò
> Thou (art a) righteous King.
>2. I po su ba su
>Thou (art) pure. Offer libations to this unique Ba
>3. Se gyo
> (of) the Se gyo.
>4. Po tu Po/ Po da tu Po
> The pure grand refuge is smooth
>5. ???????
>6. Po ku tu
> Pure cleansing this refuge
> Po gbe tu tu
> The santified King and his refuge
>7. Po ni tu fa
> The pure principal of life is in possession of this abode
>8. Ba su
>The Ba is vigorous
>9. Pe kyu
>Prodigious tomb
>10. ??????
Somewhere between 5 and 10 (5 and 9 in Justeson) we've gotten out of
synch. Justeson splits signs 6, 7 and 8 into V6ab [?+AND.THEN], V7ab
[tu+CLOTH] and V8ab [FOLD+pa2]. Can you indicate which of these you
have taken as two separate signs?
And somewhere between here and the end, we get back in synch (your 30
"yo pe" is Justeson's 30 "wU"). Which two of the signs numbered
V24-V29 in Justeson are taken by you as a single sign?
>25. Po tu
> Righteous King
>26. Po i ku tu
> Thou head the government is pure
>27. Ta ki ku gyo ta kye ba gba da
> Ta Ki "[This] sacre raising of a star [Yo Pe]
> Ku gyo "[is] the summit of righteousness
> Ta kye ba "This man [is] great
> gba da "[he] glows at this moment
>
> " [Yo Pe] is a raising star. [He is] the summit
> of righteousness. This man [Yo Pe] is great. [He]
> glows [like a shinning star] at this moment."
>28. Da
> At this moment
>29. Po yo ta fa ta
> The pure image of the race and mystic order is full of propriety"
>30. Yo Pe
>
> Po yo ta fa ta Yo Pe
> "The pure image of the race and mystic order, full of
> propriety [is] Yo Pe."
>
==
t.sag...@utoronto.ca
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On 21 Mar 1998 17:18:45 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
Winters) wrote:
>3. Se gyo
> (of) the Se gyo.
Any reason why this sign * * shouldn't be 12?
-------
-------
>29. Po yo ta fa ta
> The pure image of the race and mystic order is full of propriety"
>30. Yo Pe
>
> Po yo ta fa ta Yo Pe
> "The pure image of the race and mystic order, full of
> propriety [is] Yo Pe."
po = "pure" [there's an awful lot of them...]. Am I right in assuming
that you identify:
yo = "image"
ta = "race"
fa = "mystic order"
ta = "propriety" ?
Is there any reason that you have written down the "Proto-Mande" using
English syntax? The Bambara word-order would require: "RACE AND
MYSTIC-ORDER IMAGE PURE, ..." (in your assumed terms: ta [ni] fa yo
po).
That's to say: English X of Y is expressed as YX in Bambara; adjective
follows noun; the clause word-order is: Subject-Object-Verb [this
distinguishes Mande from most other West-African languages which are
SVO].
Loren Petrich
In article <356390e8....@news.wxs.nl>,
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal <m...@wxs.nl> wrote:
>Is there any reason that you have written down the "Proto-Mande" using
>English syntax? The Bambara word-order would require: "RACE AND
>MYSTIC-ORDER IMAGE PURE, ..." (in your assumed terms: ta [ni] fa yo
>po).
>That's to say: English X of Y is expressed as YX in Bambara; adjective
>follows noun; the clause word-order is: Subject-Object-Verb [this
>distinguishes Mande from most other West-African languages which are
>SVO].
That's another interesting way of recognizing
comparative-linguistic incompetence: lack of awareness of syntactical
differences between languages.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
pet...@netcom.com And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
Clyde A. Winters
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal (m...@wxs.nl) wrote:
: On 21 Mar 1998 17:18:45 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
: Winters) wrote:
: A few questions about the numbering of the signs:
: > Below is a transliteration of the the 30 "signs" in Column B of the new
: >Mojarra text.
: >1. Po i tò
: > Thou (art a) righteous King.
: >2. I po su ba su
: >Thou (art) pure. Offer libations to this unique Ba
: >3. Se gyo
: > (of) the Se gyo.
: >4. Po tu Po/ Po da tu Po
: > The pure grand refuge is smooth
: >5. ???????
: >6. Po ku tu
: > Pure cleansing this refuge
: > Po gbe tu tu
: > The santified King and his refuge
: >7. Po ni tu fa
: > The pure principal of life is in possession of this abode
: >8. Ba su
: >The Ba is vigorous
: >9. Pe kyu
: >Prodigious tomb
: >10. ??????
: Somewhere between 5 and 10 (5 and 9 in Justeson) we've gotten out of
: synch. Justeson splits signs 6, 7 and 8 into V6ab [?+AND.THEN], V7ab
: [tu+CLOTH] and V8ab [FOLD+pa2]. Can you indicate which of these you
: have taken as two separate signs?
: >11. Yo Pe
: And somewhere between here and the end, we get back in synch (your 30
: "yo pe" is Justeson's 30 "wU"). Which two of the signs numbered
: V24-V29 in Justeson are taken by you as a single sign?
: >25. Po tu
: > Righteous King
: >26. Po i ku tu
: > Thou head the government is pure
: >27. Ta ki ku gyo ta kye ba gba da
: > Ta Ki "[This] sacre raising of a star [Yo Pe]
: > Ku gyo "[is] the summit of righteousness
: > Ta kye ba "This man [is] great
: > gba da "[he] glows at this moment
: >
: > " [Yo Pe] is a raising star. [He is] the summit
: > of righteousness. This man [Yo Pe] is great. [He]
: > glows [like a shinning star] at this moment."
: >28. Da
: > At this moment
: >29. Po yo ta fa ta
: > The pure image of the race and mystic order is full of propriety"
: >30. Yo Pe
: >
: > Po yo ta fa ta Yo Pe
: > "The pure image of the race and mystic order, full of
: > propriety [is] Yo Pe."
: >
: ==
: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
: Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
: m...@wxs.nl |_____________|||
: ========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
I have deciphered the 30 signs in row B. I deciphered these signs from
top to bottom. All the signs noted in the article have been translated.
C. A. Winters
Clyde A. Winters
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal (m...@wxs.nl) wrote:
: On 21 Mar 1998 17:18:45 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
: Winters) wrote:
: >3. Se gyo
: > (of) the Se gyo.
: Any reason why this sign * * shouldn't be 12?
: -------
: -------
Yes, the context of the passage makes it appear that these signs were
words instead of numbers.
: >29. Po yo ta fa ta
: > The pure image of the race and mystic order is full of propriety"
: >30. Yo Pe
: >
: > Po yo ta fa ta Yo Pe
: > "The pure image of the race and mystic order, full of
: > propriety [is] Yo Pe."
: po = "pure" [there's an awful lot of them...]. Am I right in assuming
: that you identify:
: yo = "image"
: ta = "race"
: fa = "mystic order"
: ta = "propriety" ?
No
Yo=image of the race
ta=mystic order
fa=full
ta= propriety
: Is there y reason that you have written down the "Proto-Mande" using
: English syntax? The Bambara word-order would require: "RACE AND
: MYSTIC-ORDER IMAGE PURE, ..." (in your assumed terms: ta [ni] fa yo
: po).
Good observation. I did not provide a literal translation of the
inscription in Bambara/Malinke syntax. I wnated to provide the readers
of this ng an English translation of the Mojarra inscription.
C.A. Winters
: That's to say: English X of Y is expressed as YX in Bambara; adjective
: follows noun; the clause word-order is: Subject-Object-Verb [this
: distinguishes Mande from most other West-African languages which are
: SVO].
: ==
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On 22 Mar 1998 13:55:02 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
Winters) wrote:
>I have deciphered the 30 signs in row B. I deciphered these signs from
>top to bottom. All the signs noted in the article have been translated.
Yes, but that's not what I asked. There is a mismatch between your
numbering and the numbering in the Justeson/Kaufman article, which
contains a graphic of the actual glyphs. If I am to give your
interpretation a "serious look-see", I must match your translation to
the glyphs, and there are two areas (your groups 6-9 and 25-29) where
I cannot do that.
My questions are really simple:
- How do your 6-9 relate to J/K's 6ab, 7ab, 8ab?
- How do your 25-29 relate to J/K's 24-29?
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On 22 Mar 1998 14:02:45 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
Winters) wrote:
>Miguel Carrasquer Vidal (m...@wxs.nl) wrote:
>: Is there [an]y reason that you have written down the "Proto-Mande" using
>: English syntax? The Bambara word-order would require: "RACE AND
>: MYSTIC-ORDER IMAGE PURE, ..." [snip]
>Good observation. I did not provide a literal translation of the
>inscription in Bambara/Malinke syntax. I wnated to provide the readers
>of this ng an English translation of the Mojarra inscription.
Fine. However, to be able to evaluate your interpretation on a
scholarly basis, we need additional information. The Justeson/Kaufman
article gives:
1) a transliteration of the sign (sign-group)
2) a reconstruction of the Proto-Mixe-Zoque
3) a morphological analysis
4) a literal word-for-word translation
5) a free translation
There seems to be very little in the way of morphology (esp. verbs) in
your interpretation, but it might be useful to clarify the
Proto-Mandinka (e.g. you interpret "fa" as full, while the Bambara
word I have is "falen"), and it is certainly indispensable to have a
word-for-word translation in the correct order as written (I realize
that you interpret the signs as composite, but I wonder if you assume
a fixed reading-order within the glyph, e.g. outside-in/up-down [Glyph
1: po tO i] or inside-out/down-up [Glyph 1: i tO po]).
Clyde A. Winters
: Winters) wrote:
I did not use proto-Malinke-Bambara to read these inscriptions. The
source for the definitions for all the words in this text were
mentioned already.
C.A. Winters
Clyde A. Winters
: Winters) wrote:
: >I have deciphered the 30 signs in row B. I deciphered these signs from
: >top to bottom. All the signs noted in the article have been translated.
: Yes, but that's not what I asked. There is a mismatch between your
: numbering and the numbering in the Justeson/Kaufman article, which
: contains a graphic of the actual glyphs. If I am to give your
: interpretation a "serious look-see", I must match your translation to
: the glyphs, and there are two areas (your groups 6-9 and 25-29) where
: I cannot do that.
: My questions are really simple:
: - How do your 6-9 relate to J/K's 6ab, 7ab, 8ab?
: - How do your 25-29 relate to J/K's 24-29?
: ==
: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
: Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
: m...@wxs.nl |_____________|||
: ========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
They are the same inscriptions. J/K read them their way and I used the
Vai signs to give each Olmec compound sign its phonetic value.
C.A. Winters
Akan Ifriqiya
Why Via signs? They are not invented until the 19th century.
Ramira Naka
ke...@jps.net
In article <356390e8....@news.wxs.nl>,
m...@wxs.nl wrote:
>
> On 21 Mar 1998 17:18:45 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
> Winters) wrote:
>
> Is there any reason that you have written down the "Proto-Mande" using
> English syntax? The Bambara word-order would require: "RACE AND
> MYSTIC-ORDER IMAGE PURE, ..." (in your assumed terms: ta [ni] fa yo
> po).
>
> That's to say: English X of Y is expressed as YX in Bambara; adjective
> follows noun; the clause word-order is: Subject-Object-Verb [this
> distinguishes Mande from most other West-African languages which are
> SVO].
>
Although there are instances of word order changing in languages, it
seems that Clyde has arranged the order of the words to match the
translation. Or at least this seems the case with the first line:
Po i to - "Thou (are a ) righteous king"
If I understand correctly, Clyde reads the glyphs from the inside out,
so the order might be:
To i po - "King, thou (are) righteous", or,
I to po - "Thou, King,(art) righteous"
I am wondering whether the Vai signs are also written in compound
form as suggested by Clyde for the Mojarra glyphs. And also whether
they are also read from the inside out.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
ram...@geocities.com
In article <6f64g5$aq5$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
ke...@jps.net wrote:
>
> In article <356390e8....@news.wxs.nl>,
> m...@wxs.nl wrote:
> >
> > On 21 Mar 1998 17:18:45 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
> > Winters) wrote:
> >
>
> > Is there any reason that you have written down the "Proto-Mande" using
> > English syntax? The Bambara word-order would require: "RACE AND
> > MYSTIC-ORDER IMAGE PURE, ..." (in your assumed terms: ta [ni] fa yo
> > po).
> >
> > That's to say: English X of Y is expressed as YX in Bambara; adjective
> > follows noun; the clause word-order is: Subject-Object-Verb [this
> > distinguishes Mande from most other West-African languages which are
> > SVO].
> >
>
> Although there are instances of word order changing in languages, it
> seems that Clyde has arranged the order of the words to match the
> translation. Or at least this seems the case with the first line:
>
> Po i to - "Thou (are a ) righteous king"
>
> If I understand correctly, Clyde reads the glyphs from the inside out,
> so the order might be:
>
> To i po - "King, thou (are) righteous", or,
>
> I to po - "Thou, King,(art) righteous"
>
> I am wondering whether the Vai signs are also written in compound
> form as suggested by Clyde for the Mojarra glyphs. And also whether
> they are also read from the inside out.
And I continue to wonder at the relevance of Vai signs at all? Perhaps you
have not noted they were invented in the early 19th c. A short search will
give you my original comments on this, including the relevant references.
Ramira Naka
Clyde A. Winters
ke...@jps.net wrote:
: In article <356390e8....@news.wxs.nl>,
: m...@wxs.nl wrote:
: >
: > On 21 Mar 1998 17:18:45 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
: > Winters) wrote:
: >
: > Is there any reason that you have written down the "Proto-Mande" using
: > English syntax? The Bambara word-order would require: "RACE AND
: > MYSTIC-ORDER IMAGE PURE, ..." (in your assumed terms: ta [ni] fa yo
: > po).
: >
: > That's to say: English X of Y is expressed as YX in Bambara; adjective
: > follows noun; the clause word-order is: Subject-Object-Verb [this
: > distinguishes Mande from most other West-African languages which are
: > SVO].
: >
: Although there are instances of word order changing in languages, it
: seems that Clyde has arranged the order of the words to match the
: translation. Or at least this seems the case with the first line:
: Po i to - "Thou (are a ) righteous king"
: If I understand correctly, Clyde reads the glyphs from the inside out,
: so the order might be:
: To i po - "King, thou (are) righteous", or,
: I to po - "Thou, King,(art) righteous"
: I am wondering whether the Vai signs are also written in compound
: form as suggested by Clyde for the Mojarra glyphs. And also whether
: they are also read from the inside out.
: Regards,
: Paul Kekai Manansala
In the rock art of Africa the Vai signs are not compounded.
The Olmec signs are usually read from the outside in. In the
example I gave in the original post I first deciphered the box figure
which is Po=pure. Then I read the characters inside the central figure.
C.A. Winters
: -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On 25 Mar 1998 03:41:31 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
Winters) wrote:
>In the rock art of Africa the Vai signs are not compounded.
That's a bit of a problem then.
> The Olmec signs are usually read from the outside in. In the
>example I gave in the original post I first deciphered the box figure
>which is Po=pure. Then I read the characters inside the central figure.
And that's a bit of a problem too. In Bambara, "you great king" would
be, if I'm not mistaken, "YOU KING GREAT" ("i masa ba"), with the
adjective last, not first. Ramira?
So what we have so far is: it's not proper Vai-script (which is 19th
c. anyway), it's not proper Mande syntax, the obvious sign for "7" is
translated as "(of) the Se Gyo" [whatever that means], and there's
still those two unexplained mismatches in the numbering of the signs.
Doesn't look good...
Clyde A. Winters
: Winters) wrote:
: >In the rock art of Africa the Vai signs are not compounded.
: That's a bit of a problem then.
: > The Olmec signs are usually read from the outside in. In the
: >example I gave in the original post I first deciphered the box figure
: >which is Po=pure. Then I read the characters inside the central figure.
: And that's a bit of a problem too. In Bambara, "you great king" would
: be, if I'm not mistaken, "YOU KING GREAT" ("i masa ba"), with the
: adjective last, not first. Ramira?
You are mistaken in this interpretation of my translation of the Olmec
text. 1) You have already admitted that you do not have Delofosse's La
Lague Mandingue et ses dialectes, so you can not follow my translation
of Mande terms which were taken from this publication. 2) As a result
you have began to create your own interpretation of Olmec signs based
on what ever source you are using.
I provide a sign for sign translation of the Olmec writing based on
the Vai signs collected by Delofosse because he published the most
detailed list of Mande signs. The list of Vai signs published by Dalby
fails to include every know Vai sign. Other list of Vai signs were
collected by a German scholar. I have had to refer to all the list of
Vai signs to read the Olmec inscriptions, because each Vai sign list
has some Vai signs missing from one or more of the other list.
: So what we have so far is: it's not proper Vai-script (which is 19th
: c. anyway),
As I have discussed earlier in my post the Vai syllabary was invented
earlier than the 19th century. It was popularized in the 19th century
by members of a Vai secret society. The fact that these signs are
associated with the earliest representations of the god Aman in the
Sahara , support the antiquity of this writing. This view was supported
by Deloffosse and Hsu.
it's not proper Mande syntax, the obvious sign for "7" is
: translated as "(of) the Se Gyo" [whatever that means], and there's
Bernard has suggested that the signs Se and Gyo were numerals. If you
would check out Deloffosse's , Les Vai, leur langue et leur systeme
d'ecriture, L'Anthropologie, 10 (1899), you will see the Vai signs.
I know you said in an earlier post that your library does not have the
works of Diop or Obenga, but I am sure you can find the Anthropologie
article and see this sign for yourself. In this way you could stop
trying to read into signs meanings that you have made up yourself.
: still those two unexplained mismatches in the numbering of the signs.
: Doesn't look good...
: ==
: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
: Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
: m...@wxs.nl |_____________|||
: ========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
What are the mismatches you are talking about?
Moreover, instead of repeating the fact that I have not made literal
translations of the Olmec signs, please get the proper sources written
by Deloffose to discuss my decipherment. The fact that I used
Delofosse's list of Vai signs ( along with Vai signs from other list)
is the main reason why I continue to use Deloffose's transcription of
Mande terms, rather than those of modern researchers. This results from
the fact that by using the Vai signs and La langue Mandigue et ses
dialectes you can make a word for word interpretation of the Mande
signs found on the Olmec inscriptions.
C.A. Winters
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On 25 Mar 1998 12:45:51 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
Winters) wrote:
>1) You have already admitted that you do not have Delofosse's La
>Lague Mandingue et ses dialectes
I don't recall ever admitting to that, but you're right, I don't have
it. Neither does the library (Ernest Francois Maurice Delafosse
[1870-1926]. Titles listed: "Les noirs de l'Afrique", 1921; "Les
ne`gres", 1927, "L'a^me ne`gre", 1922). I'll have to get it through
ILL.
>: still those two unexplained mismatches in the numbering of the signs.
>
>What are the mismatches you are talking about?
WINTERS JUSTESON/KAUFMAN
1. Po i tò 1. 7i
2. I po su ba su 2. si
3. Se gyo 3. TWELVE
4. Po tu Po/ Po da tu Po 4. YEAR
5. ??????? 5. [TITLE?]
6. Po ku tu / Po gbe tu tu 6. ?+AND.THEN
7. Po ni tu fa 7. tu+CLOTH
8. Ba su 8. FOLD+pa2
9. Pe kyu <=== mismatch #1 (6-9)
10. ?????? 9. [UTTER?]
11. Yo Pe 10. wU
12. Po i tu 11. 7i
13. Se ni gyo tè to nde 12. ORDER.STONES
14. Pe kyu 13. je
15. Ni tu la / Ni gyu la 14. tzU
16. Yo be 15. SYMBOL
17. Po 16. ?
18. Yo ngbe Bi 17. TITLE2
19. Yo Pe 18. wU
20. Po su 19. na
21. Lu kyu lu kyu 20. tze-tze
22. Be ta gyu 21. PLANT
23. Po i tu 22. 7i
24. Yo Pe 23. wU
25. Po tu 24. tuk
26. Po i ku tu 25. SHAPESHIFTER2
27. Ta ki ku gyo 26. ma
ta kye ba gba da 27. sa <== mismatch #2 (25-29)
28. Da 28. ni
29. Po yo ta fa ta 29. APPEAR
30. Yo Pe 30. wU
ke...@jps.net
In article <6fau9v$guv$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>,
> : Winters) wrote:
>
> : >In the rock art of Africa the Vai signs are not compounded.
>
Were the compound graphs, then, an American invention?
> : That's a bit of a problem then.
>
> : > The Olmec signs are usually read from the outside in. In the
> : >example I gave in the original post I first deciphered the box figure
> : >which is Po=pure. Then I read the characters inside the central figure.
>
> : And that's a bit of a problem too. In Bambara, "you great king" would
> : be, if I'm not mistaken, "YOU KING GREAT" ("i masa ba"), with the
> : adjective last, not first. Ramira?
>
> You are mistaken in this interpretation of my translation of the Olmec
> text. 1) You have already admitted that you do not have Delofosse's La
> Lague Mandingue et ses dialectes, so you can not follow my translation
> of Mande terms which were taken from this publication. 2) As a result
> you have began to create your own interpretation of Olmec signs based
> on what ever source you are using.
> I provide a sign for sign translation of the Olmec writing based on
> the Vai signs collected by Delofosse because he published the most
> detailed list of Mande signs. The list of Vai signs published by Dalby
> fails to include every know Vai sign. Other list of Vai signs were
> collected by a German scholar. I have had to refer to all the list of
> Vai signs to read the Olmec inscriptions, because each Vai sign list
> has some Vai signs missing from one or more of the other list.
>
I have the Dalby list, and he does mention there are some ideographic
signs, but his charts give only the syllabic ones.
> : So what we have so far is: it's not proper Vai-script (which is 19th
> : c. anyway),
>
> As I have discussed earlier in my post the Vai syllabary was invented
> earlier than the 19th century. It was popularized in the 19th century
> by members of a Vai secret society. The fact that these signs are
> associated with the earliest representations of the god Aman in the
> Sahara , support the antiquity of this writing. This view was supported
> by Deloffosse and Hsu.
>
I'll have to check up on my list of emblems and symbols from African
rock art. Many of the signs look familiar.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
cwin...@kiwi.dep.anl.gov
In article <35271218...@news.wxs.nl>,
m...@wxs.nl wrote:
>
> On 25 Mar 1998 12:45:51 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
> Winters) wrote:
>
> >1) You have already admitted that you do not have Delofosse's La
Below is a corrected copy of the inscription:
Below is a transliteration of the the 30 "signs" in Column B of the new
Mojarra text.
1. Po i tò
Thou (art a) righteous King.
2. I po su ba su
Thou (art) pure. Offer libations to this unique Ba
3. Se gyo
(of) the Se gyo.
4. Po tu Po/ Po da tu Po
The pure grand refuge is smooth
5. ???????
6. Po ku tu
Pure cleansing this refuge
Po gbe tu tu
The santified King and his refuge
7. Po ni tu fa
The pure principal of life is in possession of this abode
8. Ba su
The Ba is vigorous
8b. Pe kyu
Prodigious tomb
9. ??????
10. Yo Pe
King Yo Pe
11. Po i tu
Pure (is) thine refuge
12. Se ni gyo tè to nde
[Yo Pe's] Principal of life to realize no vice
(in this) good abode/habitation on terrain near the water
13. Pe kyu
The prodigious tomb
14. Ni tu la
The soul of the King sleeps
or
Ni gyu la
The soul, and spiritual tranquility (is) established
15. Yo be
The vital spirit (has ) been put to bed
16. Po
(In) Purity
17. Yo ngbe Bi
The soul is pure righteousness of the great ancestor
18. Yo Pe
29. Po su
The pure libation
20. Lu kyu lu kyu
Hold upright this hemispheric tomb.
Hold upright this hemispheric tomb.
21. Be ta gyu
[It] exist in a unique state of spiritual tranquility
22. Po i tu
Pure is thine refuge
23. Yo Pe
24. Po tu
Righteous King
25. Po i ku tu
Thou head the government is pure
26.Po tu lu (lit. Purity head government/king hold upright)
The head of the government holds upright Purity.
27. Ta ki ku gyo ta kye ba gba da
Ta Ki "[This] sacre raising of a star [Yo Pe]
Ku gyo "[is] the summit of righteousness
Ta kye ba "This man [is] great
gba da "[he] glows at this moment
" [Yo Pe] is a raising star. [He is] the summit
of righteousness. This man [Yo Pe] is great. [He]
glows [like a shinning star] at this moment."
28. Da
At this moment
29. Po yo ta fa ta
The pure image of the race and mystic order is full of
propriety"
30. Yo Pe
C.A. Winters
cwin...@kiwi.dep.anl.gov
Below is a transliteration of the the 30 "signs" in Column B of the new
Mojarra text.
1. Po i tò
Thou (art a) righteous King.
2. I po su ba su
Thou (art) pure. Offer libations to this unique Ba
3. Se gyo
(of) the Se gyo.
4. Po tu Po/ Po da tu Po
The pure grand refuge is smooth
5. ???????
6. Po ku tu
Pure cleansing this refuge
Po gbe tu tu
The santified King and his refuge
7. Po ni tu fa
The pure principal of life is in possession of this abode
8. Ba su
The Ba is vigorous
8b. Pe kyu
Prodigious tomb
9. ??????
10. Yo Pe
King Yo Pe
11. Po i tu
Pure (is) thine refuge
12. Se ni gyo tè to nde
[Yo Pe's] Principal of life to realize no vice
(in this) good abode/habitation on terrain near the water
13. Pe kyu
The prodigious tomb
14. Ni tu la
The soul of the King sleeps
or
Ni gyu la
The soul, and spiritual tranquility (is) established
15. Yo be
The vital spirit (has ) been put to bed
16. Po
(In) Purity
17. Yo ngbe Bi
The soul is pure righteousness of the great ancestor
18. Yo Pe
29. Po su
The pure libation
20. Lu kyu lu kyu
Hold upright this hemispheric tomb.
Hold upright this hemispheric tomb.
21. Be ta gyu
[It] exist in a unique state of spiritual tranquility
22. Po i tu
Pure is thine refuge
23. Yo Pe
24. Po tu
Righteous King
25. Po i ku tu
Thou head the government is pure
26.Po tu lu (lit. Purity head government/king hold upright)
The head of the government holds upright Purity.
27. Ta ki ku gyo ta kye ba gba da
Ta Ki "[This] sacre raising of a star [Yo Pe]
Ku gyo "[is] the summit of righteousness
Ta kye ba "This man [is] great
gba da "[he] glows at this moment
" [Yo Pe] is a raising star. [He is] the summit
of righteousness. This man [Yo Pe] is great. [He]
glows [like a shinning star] at this moment."
28. Da
At this moment
29. Po yo ta fa ta
The pure image of the race and mystic order is full of
propriety"
30. Yo Pe
JoatSimeon
And the Vai script was, of course, invented in the 19th century.
-- S.M. Stirling
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On Wed, 25 Mar 1998 13:06:19 -0600, cwin...@kiwi.dep.anl.gov wrote:
>You were right I had translated 8b as 9 and I failed to decipher line 26.
>Below is a corrected copy of the inscription:
Well, glad we *finally* cleared that up. A la tercera va la vencida,
as we say in Spanish.
It might take a while before I have access to Delafosse.
Akan Ifriqiya
>You are mistaken in this interpretation of my translation of the Olmec
>text. 1) You have already admitted that you do not have Delofosse's La
>Lague Mandingue et ses dialectes, so you can not follow my translation
>of Mande terms which were taken from this publication. 2) As a result
>you have began to create your own interpretation of Olmec signs based
>on what ever source you are using.
> I provide a sign for sign translation of the Olmec writing based on
>the Vai signs collected by Delofosse because he published the most
>detailed list of Mande signs. The list of Vai signs published by Dalby
>fails to include every know Vai sign. Other list of Vai signs were
>collected by a German scholar. I have had to refer to all the list of
>Vai signs to read the Olmec inscriptions, because each Vai sign list
>has some Vai signs missing from one or more of the other list.
>
>
>: So what we have so far is: it's not proper Vai-script (which is 19th
>: c. anyway),
>
>As I have discussed earlier in my post the Vai syllabary was invented
>earlier than the 19th century. It was popularized in the 19th century
>by members of a Vai secret society. The fact that these signs are
>associated with the earliest representations of the god Aman in the
>Sahara , support the antiquity of this writing. This view was supported
>by Deloffosse and Hsu. [Hue?]
Really? Care to quote in extenso? The actual Vai inventor(s) explictely
stated they invented them. It is a firm tradition and collected first hand
by two different sources from the very inventors of the script not 20 years
after the event. I can think of no logical reason why the Vai would claim
their writing to be something new, as opposed to something ancient. In
short, you're making this up by torturing Ms. Hue's speculations (which she
firmly labels as such) that Bambaran style signs were used as script before
the 19th c.
Ramira Naka
[snip]
>Moreover, instead of repeating the fact that I have not made literal
>translations of the Olmec signs, please get the proper sources written
>by Deloffose to discuss my decipherment. The fact that I used
>Delofosse's list of Vai signs ( along with Vai signs from other list)
>is the main reason why I continue to use Deloffose's transcription of
>Mande terms, rather than those of modern researchers. This results from
>the fact that by using the Vai signs and La langue Mandigue et ses
>dialectes you can make a word for word interpretation of the Mande
>signs found on the Olmec inscriptions.
I don't even know how .... Winters grasps for straws. And he uses Delafosse,
who claims the Vai script was never widespread c. fin de siecle. Pauvre
idiot.
Ramira Naka
ram...@geocities.com
cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A. Winters) wrote:
> I provide a sign for sign translation of the Olmec writing based on
> the Vai signs collected by Delofosse because he published the most
> detailed list of Mande signs. The list of Vai signs published by Dalby
> fails to include every know Vai sign. Other list of Vai signs were
> collected by a German scholar. I have had to refer to all the list of
> Vai signs to read the Olmec inscriptions, because each Vai sign list
> has some Vai signs missing from one or more of the other list.
Perhaps you might cite to each sign and the list? I assume the "German"
scholar is none other than the fellow who first wrote about it after its
discovery. Why are you so coy with your sources? (For those checking, see my
comments below for a modern reprint of the Kaella work.)
> : So what we have so far is: it's not proper Vai-script (which is 19th
> : c. anyway),
>
> As I have discussed earlier in my post the Vai syllabary was invented
> earlier than the 19th century. It was popularized in the 19th century
> by members of a Vai secret society. The fact that these signs are
> associated with the earliest representations of the god Aman in the
> Sahara , support the antiquity of this writing. This view was supported
> by Deloffosse and Hsu.
I assume here Winters is once more distorting the work of Ms. Hau (not Hue as
I wrote earlier, sorry.). Below I repeat my original Feb. comments on this
issue, although with some notes on the slippery evolution of Witners' claims.
[snip]
I thought I might go back and look at the evolution of Witners' claims (I
have already noted his shifting references before, but in re. the alphabet I
find this particularly interesting.)
In
Subject: Re: Olmecs: Mesoamerica's First "Great" Civilization?
From: cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A. Winters)
Date: 1997/12/13
Message-ID: <66tcs2$kdh$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Winters claimed:
:M. Delafosse, Les Vai, leur langue et leur systeme
:d'ecriture, <L'Anthropologie 10, (1899, pp.124-151), made
:it clear that the Vai claimed that their writing system was
:very old and came from the Niger area.
I shall try to check this because none of the works I consulted noted such a
claim by Delafosse. Indeed as I noted an earlier posting [1] Delafosse has
been characterized as poopooing the extant of the usage of Vai signs, even
after their invention. Winters' claim seems, well, suspicious. Rather like
his characterizations of the McIntosh articles, or even Ms. Hau's articles.
[1] :
Subject: Re: Mande and Maya connections (Moving along to Nok?)
From: Ak...@pizlink.net (Akan Ifriqiya)
Date: 1998/02/26
Message-ID: <6d34tg$4cf$1...@kali.ziplink.net>
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,sci.anthropology
Winters wrote in his earlier Dec. posting cited above
" This view is supported by the fact that Numerous inscriptions pre-dating
the popularization of Vai writing in 1834, are found
throughout the Niger bend area, and Saharan Africa which
was the homeland of the Mande. This led K. Hau, Pre-Islamic
writing in west africa", <Bull. de l'IFAN, t.35, ser B,
no.1 (1973, pp.1-45) to declare that the Mande writing was
used by the Mande until they adopted Islam. C. A. Winters,
"The influence of the Mande scripts on ...", <Bull. de
l'IFAN, t.39, SerB, no.2 (1977, pp.405-431) explained how
this writing was maintained among the Mande within their
secret societies. "
Pay careful attention to how he writes here re Ms. Hau. To repeat my
comments from my Feb. post, I know of no substantiated claims Mande
languages were written before the adoption of Ajami arabic scripts (that is
African languages written with arabic script(s) an important *indigenous*
development by mandeka, peul and later Hausa).
Winters cited to Ms. Hau, who argued based on the script which
the Vai people invented in the early 19th century, that there must have been
writing of some sort, possibly ideographic, among the Mande speakers. She,
however does not argue conclusively for such a thing and in any case, bases
her case on sheer speculation on a perceived necessity for script in the
elaboration of the ancient state of Ghana. (K. Hau, "PreIslamic writing in
West Africa", Bulletin de l'Institut Fondamental Afrique Noire (IFAN), , Ser.
B vol. 35, no. 1, 1973, p. 17) She rather heatedly –apparently in response
to criticism which I did not bother tracking down— attacks suggestions that
Ghana needed no script to develop empire and attacks comparisons with a
similar Incan development of elaborate social structures without full blown
writing. (p. 16)
Her analysis, while striking me as potentially intriguing in suggesting that
Mande symbolic systems had been neglected in study, rests on the false
premise that these were of necessity either writing or precursors to writing.
She admits there is no evidence of scripts "save those of Tuareg" but
suggests, in this case rightly given the present state of archeology in West
Africa, that such evidence could have been lost. *Note: Ms. Hau, who seems a
much solider researcher than Winters --at least she knows not too push her
theories into fantasy-- does not pretend Wuslin is some kind of evidence for
Vai writing.* Again, she presents a hypothesis that writing could have been
developed from Mande religious and magical symbols, but we do not have
evidence that it was until the 19th century (see below).
Historical linguists can best evaluate her claims of connections between the
Vai script of the Vai of Liberia - Sierre Leone and "Thamudic scripts" of
north arabia, which she states were used between the 7th century B.C. and 4th
century A.D. However, the question of time depth alone makes this
proposition seem problematic from a historical point of view.
The Vai script was invented between 1814 and 1849 by a Vai (a Mande people of
Liberia and Sierra Leone) by the name of Duala Bukele. Bukele claimed that
this script was revealed to him in a dream by a white man but that he forgot
upon awakening some of the symbols so he and six cohorts redevised some
symbols. (I would note the possible reference to Muslim importation of
writing from Arabs as an explanation for the "white man" iconography) It was
first reported by a British naval officer in 1849 and described in 1854 by a
German scholar, Kaella (S.W. Kaella "Outlines of a grammar for the Vei
language" London: Church Missionary House 1854. Reprint Gregg International
1968) immediately after the script's "discovery" was announced. (Scribner,
Sylvia and Michael Cole "The Psychology of Literacy" Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1981. See esp p. 264 f, also see "The Standard Vai Script"
Monrovia: university of Liberia, 1962 .)
Scribner's account of the Vai script strikes me as less tendentious than that
of Hau, but they agree on all substantiated historical data so I do not see a
conflict there. Scribner notes that Vai traditions verify the Dula Bukele
story, who was in fact personally interviewed by the naval officer and
Koella. Various traditions suggest, according to Scribner that the script
may have been independently developed in several different locations.
Scribner noted "[t]he Vai script…can not simply be dismissed as a borrowed
innovation. Since foreign scripts in use were alphabets and the Vai script
is a syllabary, we know that whatever external influences were active in
creating pressure for an indigenous writing system, the form and articulation
of that system represented an original production." (p. 265) As Scribner
noted, it does not detract from the invention to realize that the Vai society
had been in contact for hundreds of years with both arabic script (writing in
both arabic and ajami) and latin script carried used by afro-portuguese
traders. Scribner suggests the development was pushed by impinging of Vai
life of both Latin and arabic traditions in the 1820s when Christians began
to push into their region and the Vai began to accept Islam in numbers as
Muslim Mandeka marabout-traders became established in the sizable towns.
A final note: Winters glosses over (if we are charitable) major differences
between Ms. Hau's theory, which while unorthodox, at least is posed as a
hypothesis in large part, and his own. Ms. Hau suggested that an ideographic
script was possible and further wrote: "it is unwise, considering our lack
of knowledge of Vai, Mende, Toma and Guerze to laugh off suggestions made by
some of these people that their leading secret society [the Poro] had
[ideographic] writing [at an early date]." (Hau 1973, p. 41) There is
something to be said for not dismissing the possibility of a secret religious
script analogous to the Ogham script (I hope those familiar with Celtic early
history will correct me if this is a poor analogy) but do note that Ms. Hau,
who I believe forces her arguments rather too far, is still not saying what
Winters would have her say. In regards to her suggestion, Scribner's
analysis notes the Vai writing roots in Mande graphic symbols as well as the
Bambara's own use of a secret set of 259 ideographic symbols available only
to those at high levels of secret societies. She cites Dalby ("A Survey of
indigenous scripts of Liberia and Sierra Leone: Via, Mende, Loma, Kpelle and
Bassa." African Language Studies (Univ. of London) 1967 v. 8, p. 1-51; "The
Indigenous Scripts of West Africa and Surinam: their inspiration and design"
[ibid] 1968 v. 9, p. 156-197 and "The historical problems of the indigenous
scripts of West Africa and Surinam" in Dalby ed. Language and History in West
Africa. New York: Africana, 1979 and Delafosse "Vai leur langue et leur
systeme d'ecriture", L'Anthropologie 10, 1899),
Scribner further writes: "Early travelers, writing before the invention of
any of the known West African scripts, commented on the widespread use of
graphic symbols in ritual and ceremony in this region." (Scribner, p. 266)
But again, without archeological evidence, we can not postulate an early
date for the development of an actual writing system. (For writing, I have
been directed to but have not read: P.F. de Moraes Farias "The oldest extant
writing of West Africa: medieval epigraphs from Essuk, Saney and
Egef-n-Tawaqqast (Mali)' Journal des africanistes LX 1990 65-113.) Nor can
we exclude one. It is not, however, good scholarship to write as Winters has
done. Puzzingly, he cites only Delafosse, who questioned how widespread the
Vai script even was.
I am also puzzled by his citation to Ms. Hau's "African Writing in the New
World", Bulletin de l'IFAN, ser.B vol 40 no.1, (1978) p. 28-48. Ms. Hau is
not making his argument regarding a "mande" writing system founding native
american writing, but arguing that certain painted rock or rock carvings in
Brazil suggest that African slaves continued to use their own writing or
ideographic systems while in the New World. I am not trained in the
evaluation of such evidence and so can not comment other than to say that
while her interpretations struck me as forced in re the cited artifacts, they
did not seem inherently implausible. I am not familiar enough with Brazilian
literature nor the relevant archeology to comment further
Amusingly in the same post he claimed that :
"They [the Mande] were forced to migrate all the way to the Americas bacause
up until 300 BC, the Niger Bend and most of West Africa were tropical forest
( see.P.J. McIntosh & C.A. McIntosh, "The Inland Niger Delta before the
Empire of Mali...", Journal of African History, 22 (1) (1981) )."
Of course, the McIntoshes made no such statements in their article, which
addressed the Inland Delta. Bizarre.
In further reply to Bernard's critique he also wrote in:
Subject: Re: Olmecs: Mesoamerica's First "Great" Civilization?
From: cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A. Winters)
Date: 1997/12/13
Message-ID: <66v1nr$gdf$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
"2) Oral histories are used in the Study of African history,
just because you don't accept this oral tradition of the Vai,
is not evidence that it is false."
Queer that. In fact Vai oral traditions, both those recorded around the time
the Vai script was invented and modern ones --as attested to in a University
of Liberia textbook cited above-- all hold that the script was invented
around 1820 via dream revelation. So, it seems Winters does not like to
respect our oral traditions, but likes to fabricate them for his own pet
theories.
Loren Petrich
In article <199803251931...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
JoatSimeon <joats...@aol.com> wrote:
>And the Vai script was, of course, invented in the 19th century.
My understanding is that there are several such scripts that had
been invented as a result of "stimulus diffusion". Someone had heard of
some people who use marks to represent words, and decided to try
inventing a system for their own language.
In fact, the Egyptian hieroglyphic script is sometimes thought to
have had such an origin.
JoatSimeon
>Loren Petrich:
>In fact, the Egyptian hieroglyphic script is sometimes thought to have had
such an origin:
-- yup. Probably stimulus-diffusion from Sumeria, though that remains
speculative.
-- S.M. Stirling
Akan Ifriqiya
In article <petrichE...@netcom.com>, pet...@netcom.com says...
>
>In article <199803251931...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
>JoatSimeon <joats...@aol.com> wrote:
>>And the Vai script was, of course, invented in the 19th century.
>
> My understanding is that there are several such scripts that had
>been invented as a result of "stimulus diffusion". Someone had heard of
>some people who use marks to represent words, and decided to try
>inventing a system for their own language.
>
Yes and no and no.
There are several such scripts, the Vai, Kpelle etc. The Vai script's
invention is accidentally well documented. The inventor and his
comrades/co-inventors were in fact interviewed c. 1850. See the works cited
in my other post. It was more than a matter of "having heard" of writing.
In fact, the Vai had been in contact with arabic writing and ajami writing
(that is african languages written with arabic script) for hundreds of years
and indeed at the time of invention were in the process of converting to
Islam brought by mande speaking confreres. In addition they had also had
some exposure to roman script through the portuguese and esp. the
afro-portuguese traders. However, the invention is quite independant of the
alphabetic scripts and innovative in its own right.
I would not see a need to connect any of this with Egypt. This is a purely
West African thing. There should, of course be more work on the mande
symbolic systems to understand possible deeper roots, but contra Winters,
there is by no means enough knowledge to be ascribing a Vai style system to
the ancient Bambara, for example.
Ramira Naka
Clyde A. Winters
Loren Petrich (pet...@netcom.com) wrote:
: In article <199803251931...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
: JoatSimeon <joats...@aol.com> wrote:
: >And the Vai script was, of course, invented in the 19th century.
: My understanding is that there are several such scripts that had
: been invented as a result of "stimulus diffusion". Someone had heard of
: some people who use marks to represent words, and decided to try
: inventing a system for their own language.
: In fact, the Egyptian hieroglyphic script is sometimes thought to
: have had such an origin.
: --
: Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
: pet...@netcom.com And a fast train
: My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
The Vai script was and is ancient. Over the years many researchers even
after the popularization of the Vai script in the 19th century have
claimed that it was no longer being used, only to discover later that
it was beinhg employed by members of the Vai secret societies.
Deloffose made it clear that he found an ancient origin for the Vai
script and published more Vai signs than any other researcher in the
19th century. It is very interesting that one of the nay sayers on this
list attacks Hsu article on the ancient origin of the Vai script but
this same writer never discusses my article in Bull d' IFAN which
explained why the Vai script was created in ancient times. Some people
on this list need to write rubbish so they can be recognized. They have
nothing to say and distort the actual papers they read. To this group
of authors I will offer no response because they pratice deceit. They
can keep reposting their falsehoods from now until kingdom come but I
will not waste my time answer people who seek to stimulate argument,
rather than knowledge.
I see this forum as an attempt to create a community of learners. I
know that my ideas will not be accepted by some people, and I respond
to those writers which make legitimate disputations about my research.
But several people on this list seek only to argue. I for one, do not
have the time to engage in this type of silly behavior. I feel that
these people who use this forum simply to argue without really reading
the references that counter their positions do not deserve any comment.
I am here to learn from others, share my ideas and grow intellectually.
I will not discuss issues with people that use this forum to argue with
people while they fill their empty, lonely lives.
C.A. Winters
Akan Ifriqiya
In article <6fdkij$okp$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu
says...
>
>Loren Petrich (pet...@netcom.com) wrote:
>: In article <199803251931...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
>: JoatSimeon <joats...@aol.com> wrote:
>: >And the Vai script was, of course, invented in the 19th century.
>
>: My understanding is that there are several such scripts that had
>: been invented as a result of "stimulus diffusion". Someone had heard of
>: some people who use marks to represent words, and decided to try
>: inventing a system for their own language.
>
>: In fact, the Egyptian hieroglyphic script is sometimes thought to
>: have had such an origin.
>
>: --
>: Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
>: pet...@netcom.com And a fast train
>: My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
>
>
>The Vai script was and is ancient. Over the years many researchers even
>after the popularization of the Vai script in the 19th century have
>claimed that it was no longer being used, only to discover later that
>it was beinhg employed by members of the Vai secret societies.
>
> Deloffose made it clear that he found an ancient origin for the Vai
>script and published more Vai signs than any other researcher in the
>19th century. It is very interesting that one of the nay sayers on this
>list attacks Hsu article on the ancient origin of the Vai script but
>this same writer never discusses my article in Bull d' IFAN which
>explained why the Vai script was created in ancient times.
Why this must be me. Thank you. I did read your article Mr. Winters,
assuming you refer to the one where you claim the Vai script is also at the
origin of the Cherokee script? I leave it the newsgroup to judge how likely
that is.
Some people
>on this list need to write rubbish so they can be recognized. They have
>nothing to say and distort the actual papers they read.
Well, aside from the rest of the fine and engaging ad hominem, I assume then
you have no answer to the McIntosh issue, that is your distortion thereof?
Ramira Naka
ram...@geocities.com
In article <petrichE...@netcom.com>,
pet...@netcom.com (Loren Petrich) wrote:
>
> In fact, the Egyptian hieroglyphic script is sometimes thought to
> have had such an origin.
Oh my apologies, I misread this initially as positing an Egyptian origin for
the Vai script.
Ramira Naka
JoatSimeon
>The Vai script was and is ancient
-- 19th century ancient.
-- S.M. Stirling
ke...@jps.net
In article <6fau9v$guv$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>,> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal (m...@wxs.nl) wrote:
> : On 25 Mar 1998 03:41:31 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
> : Winters) wrote:
>
> :
>
> Bernard has suggested that the signs Se and Gyo were numerals. If you
> would check out Deloffosse's , Les Vai, leur langue et leur systeme
> d'ecriture, L'Anthropologie, 10 (1899), you will see the Vai signs.
> I know you said in an earlier post that your library does not have the
> works of Diop or Obenga, but I am sure you can find the Anthropologie
> article and see this sign for yourself. In this way you could stop
> trying to read into signs meanings that you have made up yourself.
>
I checked this article out and indeed many more signs or variants
are listed as compared to the list of Momolu Massaquei. Delafosse
gives two sets of characters -- carateres anciens and carateres actuels --
with each set having a number of different variants.
The author agrees that these scripts were ancient among the Vai secret
societies and he believes they originate from the "Berber" alphabet.
I have copied his comparisons of the Berber and Vai characters, and it
is available at this URL:
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple/9845/vai.htm
Obviously, there are lots of matches (6) or near-matches (7)in form between
the Berber alphabet and the Vai syllabary, and there are five fairly close
matches in form and sound (of the consonant values). I would agree that the
odds of this happening purely by coincidence are very low. Of course, this
alone would not mean that Vai is an ancient script, but it helps Delafosse's
argument.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
ke...@jps.net
One correction on the comparison chart of Vai and Berber characters.
The first Vai sign should have the value "ta" rather than "r".
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:06:01 -0600, ke...@jps.net wrote:
>I have copied his comparisons of the Berber and Vai characters, and it
>is available at this URL:
>
>http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple/9845/vai.htm
>
>Obviously, there are lots of matches (6) or near-matches (7)in form between
>the Berber alphabet and the Vai syllabary, and there are five fairly close
>matches in form and sound (of the consonant values). I would agree that the
>odds of this happening purely by coincidence are very low. Of course, this
>alone would not mean that Vai is an ancient script, but it helps Delafosse's
>argument.
Unless the other Vai signs have quite another "look and feel" I'd say
they definitely look Tifinagh-inspired. The number of matches in form
and sound is high enough to think that the creators of the Vai script
knew some Tuareg letters [it's not the Cherokee scenario], but the
number of mismatches (shape similar but totally different sound) would
suggest that they didn't know them really well.
Paul Kekai Manansala
In article <35331a05....@news.wxs.nl>,
m...@wxs.nl (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal) wrote:
>On Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:06:01 -0600, ke...@jps.net wrote:
>
>>I have copied his comparisons of the Berber and Vai characters, and it
>>is available at this URL:
>>
>>http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple/9845/vai.htm
>>
>>Obviously, there are lots of matches (6) or near-matches (7)in form between
>>the Berber alphabet and the Vai syllabary, and there are five fairly close
>>matches in form and sound (of the consonant values). I would agree that the
>>odds of this happening purely by coincidence are very low. Of course, this
>>alone would not mean that Vai is an ancient script, but it helps Delafosse's
>>argument.
>
>Unless the other Vai signs have quite another "look and feel" I'd say
>they definitely look Tifinagh-inspired. The number of matches in form
>and sound is high enough to think that the creators of the Vai script
>knew some Tuareg letters [it's not the Cherokee scenario], but the
>number of mismatches (shape similar but totally different sound) would
>suggest that they didn't know them really well.
>
Or vice a versa. The Tuareg would have had a difficult time adapting
a syllabic script to the type of inflection in Berber. That is, if
Tuareg has this inflection (can't remember). They needed something
consonantal or alphabetic. The Vai script is actually quite impressive
with some 259 signs covering many aspects of vowel quality and
intonation.
Winters mentioned more ancient inscriptions discussed by French researchers
Lhote and Galand. Maybe these hold the answer. These seemed to have been
overlooked by other scholars who possibly could not read French, since the
inscriptions did not translate into Tuareg or other Berber languages. I wonder
if there are any more matches between Vai and these inscriptions.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
cwin...@kiwi.dep.anl.gov
In article <35331a05....@news.wxs.nl>,
m...@wxs.nl wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:06:01 -0600, ke...@jps.net wrote:
>
> >I have copied his comparisons of the Berber and Vai characters, and it
> >is available at this URL:
> >
> >http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple/9845/vai.htm
> >
> >Obviously, there are lots of matches (6) or near-matches (7)in form between
> >the Berber alphabet and the Vai syllabary, and there are five fairly close
> >matches in form and sound (of the consonant values). I would agree that
the
> >odds of this happening purely by coincidence are very low. Of course, this
> >alone would not mean that Vai is an ancient script, but it helps
Delafosse's
> >argument.
>
> Unless the other Vai signs have quite another "look and feel" I'd say
> they definitely look Tifinagh-inspired. The number of matches in form
> and sound is high enough to think that the creators of the Vai script
> knew some Tuareg letters [it's not the Cherokee scenario], but the
> number of mismatches (shape similar but totally different sound) would
> suggest that they didn't know them really well.
>
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
> Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
> m...@wxs.nl |_____________|||
>
> ========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
>
Tifinig are different scripts. Lionel Galand, Inscriptions Libyques
(Paris,1968,) and H. Lhote, Les Touaregs du Hoggar (Paris,1944, ) discussed
both of these ancient-writing systems. Both Lhote (pp.141-145) and Galand
(p.11) made it clear that Libyco-Berber inscriptions were definitely not
written in Libyan (Punic, Numidian, etc.) or Taureg .
In addition, the Vai script has different signs, which have the same
meanings. This richness of the Vai syllabary makes it apparent that it was
invented earlier than Tifinag.
This richness of the Vai characters recorded by Delafosse,and the analogy
between the Mande and Dravidian languages is what made it possible for me to
decipher the Indus Valley writing which was written in identical signs. I do
not have a scanner at this moment, but if Paul was to post all the Vai
characters readers of this list would discover that they compare favorably to
the Proto-Sumerian, Proto-Elamite and Minoan A scripts.
You will also find that the phonology of the Vai symbols may agree with
many symbols in the Semitic scripts. This results from the fact that the
ancestors of the Niger-Congo group and the speakers of Semitic languages of
Ethiopia formerly lived in the Sahara as I discussed in an earlier post to
this ng.
C.A. Winters
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998 10:45:38 -0600, cwin...@kiwi.dep.anl.gov wrote:
> As I have tried to explain in earlier post the Libyco-Berber writing and
>Tifinig are different scripts.
Different but practically identical. See:
http://alumni.eecs.berkeley.edu/~lorentz/Ancient_Scripts/berber.html
>Lionel Galand, Inscriptions Libyques
>(Paris,1968,) and H. Lhote, Les Touaregs du Hoggar (Paris,1944, ) discussed
>both of these ancient-writing systems. Both Lhote (pp.141-145) and Galand
>(p.11) made it clear that Libyco-Berber inscriptions were definitely not
>written in Libyan (Punic, Numidian, etc.) or Taureg .
Punic is *not* a Libyan/Berber language. It's Phoenician, therefore
Semitic. The Punic *alphabet* is indeed the probable source of the
Tifinagh script, as it's name indicates (ti-finagh < *poinik-). Some
of the inscriptions *can* be read in Berber. See Bernard's and Troy's
postings. None of them can be read in Mande.
And it's Tuareg, not Taureg (you can spell it in French, so why not in
English!).
> In addition, the Vai script has different signs, which have the same
>meanings. This richness of the Vai syllabary makes it apparent that it was
>invented earlier than Tifinag.
Doesn't follow. The Iberian script is clearly derived from the
Punic/Phoenician script, but with the addition of syllabic signs (BA,
BE (<bet), BI (<pi), BO, BU, TA (<taw), TE (<t.et), TI, TO, TU
(<dalet), KA (<kaf), KE (<gimel), KI, KO, KU (<quf)). See:
http://alumni.eecs.berkeley.edu/~lorentz/Ancient_Scripts/iberian.html
What the Vai did had been done before by the Iberians. So there. And
we invented vowels as well. Hey, maybe I should see if I can read the
La Mojarra stela using Iberian letters! And maybe I can do the
IVC-script as well. And Mandinka, well, that's obviously just a
dialect of Proto-Iberian. The Vai-script? A development of Iberian
script... Same as Meroitic, Shang Chinese, Mayan, you name it. I
think I've got something here :-)
> This richness of the Vai characters recorded by Delafosse,and the analogy
>between the Mande and Dravidian languages
Fantasy.
>is what made it possible for me to
>decipher the Indus Valley writing
Fantasy.
>which was written in identical signs. I do
>not have a scanner at this moment, but if Paul was to post all the Vai
>characters readers of this list would discover that they compare favorably to
>the Proto-Sumerian, Proto-Elamite and Minoan A scripts.
They sure look like Tifinagh to me. Moreover, the Proto-Sumerian,
Proto-Elamite and Linear A scripts cannot be read (we can only make
guesses), so anything you say about the phonetic value of the signs is
just what *you* say.
> You will also find that the phonology of the Vai symbols may agree with
>many symbols in the Semitic scripts. This results from the fact that the
>ancestors of the Niger-Congo group and the speakers of Semitic languages of
>Ethiopia formerly lived in the Sahara as I discussed in an earlier post to
>this ng.
Maybe it results from the fact that Vai script was inspired by
Tifinagh, which was inspired in turn by the Punic/Semitic alphabet.
Or maybe it just results from the fact that you see Vai symbols in any
script whatsoever. Have you tried Glagolitic? Rongorongo? Hangul?
Luwian Hieroglyphic? I'm sure you can see Vai signs in them too. The
rest I think you've already covered.
Paul Kekai Manansala
In article <3538ec6f....@news.wxs.nl>,
>
>> As I have tried to explain in earlier post the Libyco-Berber writing and
>>Tifinig are different scripts.
>
>Different but practically identical. See:
>http://alumni.eecs.berkeley.edu/~lorentz/Ancient_Scripts/berber.html
>
>>Lionel Galand, Inscriptions Libyques
>>(Paris,1968,) and H. Lhote, Les Touaregs du Hoggar (Paris,1944, ) discussed
>>both of these ancient-writing systems. Both Lhote (pp.141-145) and Galand
>>(p.11) made it clear that Libyco-Berber inscriptions were definitely not
>>written in Libyan (Punic, Numidian, etc.) or Taureg .
>
>Punic is *not* a Libyan/Berber language. It's Phoenician, therefore
>Semitic. The Punic *alphabet* is indeed the probable source of the
>Tifinagh script, as it's name indicates (ti-finagh < *poinik-). Some
>of the inscriptions *can* be read in Berber. See Bernard's and Troy's
>postings.
I have tried to keep track of this thread, and don't know how you come to
the conclusion they can be read in Berber.
Bernard posted this quote of O'Connor on Galand:
"Second, no single Berber language can
be identified with the language of the script; thus the term łBerber˛ is
used here to refer to one or more unspecified languages not identified
with living tongues. Galand has gone so far as to propose that the script
is undeciphered, though he does not deny that it is alphabetic and that it
could be related to a Berber language. Most other scholars are not so
skeptical-- the Berber character of the ancient kingdoms is guaranteed by
the attested names..." (OąConnor 1996:113-114).
Thus, there is no claim that the inscriptions can be translated into
Berber. Just that the names of the "ancient kingdoms" have a "Berber
character." In fact, O'Connor states that the language cannot be
"identified with living tongues."
On Lhote, Bernard ignored Winter's reference and used a different source which
did not deal directly with the inscriptions in question.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
On Fri, 27 Mar 98 17:15:29 GMT, ke...@jps.net (Paul Kekai Manansala)
wrote:
>Bernard posted this quote of O'Connor on Galand:
>
>"Second, no single Berber language can
>be identified with the language of the script; thus the term łBerber˛ is
>used here to refer to one or more unspecified languages not identified
>with living tongues. Galand has gone so far as to propose that the script
>is undeciphered, though he does not deny that it is alphabetic and that it
>could be related to a Berber language. Most other scholars are not so
>skeptical-- the Berber character of the ancient kingdoms is guaranteed by
>the attested names..." (OąConnor 1996:113-114).
>
>Thus, there is no claim that the inscriptions can be translated into
>Berber. Just that the names of the "ancient kingdoms" have a "Berber
>character." In fact, O'Connor states that the language cannot be
>"identified with living tongues."
Yes. Just like the Latin inscriptions cannot be related to any living
variety of Romance.
ke...@jps.net
In article <353d0663....@news.wxs.nl>,
m...@wxs.nl wrote:
>
> On Fri, 27 Mar 98 17:15:29 GMT, ke...@jps.net (Paul Kekai Manansala)
> wrote:
>
> >Bernard posted this quote of O'Connor on Galand:
> >
> >"Second, no single Berber language can
> >be identified with the language of the script; thus the term łBerber˛ is
> >used here to refer to one or more unspecified languages not identified
> >with living tongues. Galand has gone so far as to propose that the script
> >is undeciphered, though he does not deny that it is alphabetic and that it
> >could be related to a Berber language. Most other scholars are not so
> >skeptical-- the Berber character of the ancient kingdoms is guaranteed by
> >the attested names..." (OąConnor 1996:113-114).
> >
> >Thus, there is no claim that the inscriptions can be translated into
> >Berber. Just that the names of the "ancient kingdoms" have a "Berber
> >character." In fact, O'Connor states that the language cannot be
> >"identified with living tongues."
>
> Yes. Just like the Latin inscriptions cannot be related to any living
> variety of Romance.
>
Has anyone translated the inscriptions in Proto-Berber? The only thing
the quote mentions is names that have a "Berber character." I guess
its referring to names in the historical sources.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
ram...@geocities.com
>On Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:06:01 -0600, ke...@jps.net wrote:
>
>I have copied his comparisons of the Berber and Vai characters, and it
>is available at this URL:
>http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple/9845/vai.htm
Thank you, useful, but why not the whole syllabary as well as the Berber
characters? In any event, I have asked a technologically proficient friend
to scan for me my own copy of the Delafosse full list.
>Obviously, there are lots of matches (6) or near-matches (7)in form between
>the Berber alphabet and the Vai syllabary, and there are five fairly close
>matches in form and sound (of the consonant values). I would agree that the
>odds of this happening purely by coincidence are very low. Of course, this
>alone would not mean that Vai is an ancient script, but it helps Delafosse's
>argument.
Well, please do see below for my commentaries and translations of Delafosse,
but you misrepresent Delafosse's argument. He held it was older than 1830s
not ancient. Il faut lire francaise. He also excluded a Berber connection.
I am would not agree with Delafosse, for he also excludes influence by
Islamic sources, which is wrong, but then he was writing in 1899.
> m...@wxs.nl (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal) wrote:
>Unless the other Vai signs have quite another "look and feel" I'd say
>they definitely look Tifinagh-inspired. The number of matches in form
>and sound is high enough to think that the creators of the Vai script
>knew some Tuareg letters [it's not the Cherokee scenario], but the
>number of mismatches (shape similar but totally different sound) would
>suggest that they didn't know them really well.
Please see my translation of Delafosse below, but do note, there are 200 odd
characters. 7-8 matches. Pas assez comme on a ecrit.
> m...@wxs.nl (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal) wrote:
> Or vice a versa. The Tuareg would have had a difficult time adapting
> a syllabic script to the type of inflection in Berber. That is, if
> Tuareg has this inflection (can't remember). They needed something
> consonantal or alphabetic. The Vai script is actually quite impressive
> with some 259 signs covering many aspects of vowel quality and
> intonation.
ke...@jps.net (Paul Kekai Manansala) wrote:
> Winters mentioned more ancient inscriptions discussed by French researchers
> Lhote and Galand. Maybe these hold the answer. These seemed to have been
> overlooked by other scholars who possibly could not read French, since the
> inscriptions did not translate into Tuareg or other Berber languages. I wonder
> if there are any more matches between Vai and these inscriptions.
Well, it seems as if the partial and deceptive citations machine is in full
force. Firstly, having read Lhote, I would kindly ask Winters to quote in
extenso the passages where he thinks Lhote is talking about "ancient
inscriptions" as he seems to think, as do you, ancien is ancient. Winters
citations are quite frankly, worthless. The articles never say what he says
he thinks they said. Why no long quotations I ask myself, evidently the
researchers who can not read French are to be sought in this newsgroup.
Now, Let us all take a moment and take a look first at the suppositions of M.
Delafosse (whose work in this regard is, being c. 1899, not exactely cutting
edge, but viola, if M. Winters prefers 19th c.colonial administrators so be
it.) I will note before continuing that now I have had the occasion to read
the Delafosse article, that the characterization of Delafosse's comments by
Scribner cited by me earlier seem to have been incorrect, as Delafosse argues
for a larger not smaller usage of the Vai script over time. She seems to
have mistaken his comments critiquing the British (not as Delafosse writes,
American) "discover" or chronicler of the script.
Firstlly, I note to begin that Delafosse does not propose "ancient" origins
for the Vai script, only old ones. It seems that some people have a less
than complete grasp of French. " Ancien," as Delafosse wrote in his article
is "old" not "ancient" (qui est antique mes freres.) Perhaps one should
beware of those faux amis. So, let us see what he writes about the
Lybico-berber connection and the age of the Vai script, quoting in extenso (I
try here to paste international charecters in, I hope it works):
"Les alphabets usités en Afrique qui, par la forme de certains caractères, se
rapprocheraient le plus de l’alphabet vaï, sont l’alphabet gréco-latin et
l’alphabet libyque ou berbère, en usage encore aujourd’hui parmi les Touareg.
La forme générale des lettres de ce dernier alphabet, prise dans son
ensemble, a plus d’un rapport avec la forme générale des caractères vaï.
Mais ce n’est là, il me semble qu’une ressemblance purement extérieure et
fortuite, et d’où l’on ne pourrait conclure à une parenté ni à une communauté
d’origine, les 226 caractères syllabiques de l’alphabet vaï ne pouvant
vraisemblament dériver des 25 caractères consonantiques de l’alphabet
berbère, et ce dernier d’autre part, qui existait déjà au temps d’Hérodote,
ne pouvant pas apparement dériver de l’alphabet vaï dont la date
d’invention, bien que inconnue, me semble devoir être de beaucoup moins
ancienne." Delafosse "Les Vai, leur langue et leur système d’écriture."
Anthropologie 1899 p. 304.
A quick and inelegant translations, for those who do not follow French (and
please, my translating skills leave much to be desired, do correct if there
are errors):
"The alphabets utilized in Africa which by the form of certain characters
seem the closest to the Vai alphabet are the Greco-Latin alphabet and the
Libyan or Berber alphabet still in use today among the Touareg. The general
form of the letters of the last, taken together, have a greater rapport with
the general form of the Vai characters. But this isn’t really enough, it
seems to me that this is a purely fortuitous and external resemblance from
which one can not conclude neither parentage nor a community of origin. The
226 syllabic characters of the Vai alphabet could not be derived of the 25
consonal characters of the Berber alphabet. Further, this last, which
existed already in the time of Herodontus (sp) could obviously not derive
from the Vai alphabet whose invention, although unknown, must, it seems to
me, be much less old."
Delafosse does indeed discuss the analogy between certain characters, the
Berber TH with the Vai tò, the letter dz with the character gya, the letter t
with the character ta, the letter n with the character na, the letter l with
the character la, the letter b with the character ba. However he also notes
that the Berber and Vai seem to have characters of identical form but very
different significations, such as the Berber K and lè in Vai. Q in Berber,
se in Vai, s en Berber, ku~ en Vai, another s in Berber, mbo in Vai, an r in
Berber, ta~ in Vai, another r in Berber, kpo in Vai., another t in Berber,
but n~gbe in Vai.
Delafosse’s analysis concludes saying "Les analogies qu’on a vues plus haut,
comme les différences qu’on vient de voir, sont donc toutes fortuites et ne
prouvent rien sinon que, comme je lis disais plus haut, l’alphabet berbère
est celui, qui par la forme générale dont sont façonnés ses caractères ,
rappelant des figures géometriques , composés de droites, d’angles, de
points, se rapproche le plus de l’alphabet vaï et surtout des formes
paraissant les plus anciennes de cet alphabet." Again a very quick
translation: The analogies which on sees above, as the differences just
seen, are therefore fortuitous and prove nothing except that, as I said
above, the Berber alphabet is that, by its general form –whose characters
are fashioned recalling geometrical figures composed of squares, angles and
dots—which is closest to the Vai alphabet and above all the forms which
appear to the oldest of this alphabet [Vai]." (ibid, p. 305) We should not
discard his evaluation here, but I would not go for it immediately either.
On one hand, geometric basis for an alphabet perhaps will create
similarities, but perhaps we can not ignore possible common origins for the
geometric expression of the language, even if we need not go for common
parentage.
Indeed on the same page, Delafosse discussed the 21 or so equivalences with
greco-latin characters, also dismissed as fortuitous resemblances. However,
Delafosse hypothesizes that the inventors of the script possessed "several
books or manuscripts" (ibid, 306) of European origin which inspired certain
characters, saying "Il est assez naturel de penser que ces gens, ignorant
l’art d’écrire, et persuadés, selon la tradition que règne dans tous les pays
nègres, que la supérioté des blancs vient de ce qu’ils peuvent figuerer leurs
pensées sur le papier, aient voulu doter leurs compatriotes d’une
connaissance aussi utile; l’islamisme n’ayant pas encore, à cette époque,
pénétré parmi eux, ils ne savaient pas qu’il y eût d’autre système d’écriture
que celui qu’ils voyaient employer par les quelques voyageurs européens de la
côte, et on peut supposer qu’ils se sont guidés sur des manuscrits et des
imprimés d’origine européenne."
Again to translate: "It is rather natural to think these people, not knowing
the art of writing and persuaded, following the tradition which reigns in
Negro lands, that the superiority of whites comes from the fact they can put
their thoughts to paper, wanted to give their compatriots a knowledge equally
as useful. Islamism [sic] not having yet penetrated at this time into their
community, they knew no other writing system other that that which they saw
some coastal European voyagers employ, and one can suppose that they were
guided by the manuscripts and printed materials of European origin."
Well, I can only say that while Delafosse was a great man for his time, this
text reflects the spirit of a colonial administrator. Firstly, there are a
number of errors to point out. Delafosse claimed to begin, that the story of
the British naval officer who first chronicled the invention and the German
scholar, Kaelle, were wrong in their citations to the 8 men, including the
prime inventor Duala Bukele, saying he found no one who had heard of these
men. Very peculiar since Scribner specifically notes that the Duala Bukele
story (see below) is supported by Vai traditions, although some elders give
differing versions and the script may have been under partial development in
several different places at once. Second, Delafosse is simply wrong
(although do recall he is writing c. 1899) regarding the Vai contacts with
other writing systems. Mande speaking marabouts and traders were already in
contact and indeed becoming ensconced in Vai lands by the 1820s, although one
can not neglect the early presence of afro-European esp. afro-Portuguese
traders. Ergo, the Vai would have had plenty of contact with both Arabic
writing, possible northern Mande symbolic borrowings and/or commonalties with
Berbers as well as Latin script(s).
To reprise my earlier writing on this, the Vai script was invented between
1814 and 1849 by a Vai (a Mande people of Liberia and Sierra Leone) by the
name of Duala Bukele. Note, the Tifinagh connection, if there is one, must
be indirect as the Vai live hundreds of KM south of the farthest southern
reaches of Touareg zones. Bukele claimed that this script was revealed to
him in a dream by a white man but that he forgot upon awakening some of the
symbols so he and six cohorts redevised some symbols. (I would note the
possible parallel to Muslim importation of writing from Arabs as an
explanation for the "white man" iconography) It was first reported by a
British naval officer in 1849 and described in 1854 by a German scholar,
Kaella (S.W. Kaella "Outlines of a grammar for the Vei language" London:
Church Missionary House 1854. Reprint Gregg International 1968) immediately
after the script's "discovery" was announced. (Scribner, Sylvia and Michael
Cole "The Psychology of Literacy" Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
1981. See esp p. 264 f, also see "The Standard Vai Script" Monrovia:
university of Liberia, 1962 .)
Scribner notes that Vai traditions verify the Dula Bukele story, who was in
fact personally interviewed by the naval officer and Kaella. Various
traditions suggest, according to Scribner that the script may have been
independently developed in several different locations. Scribner noted
"[t]he Vai script can not simply be dismissed as a borrowed innovation.
Since foreign scripts in use were alphabets and the Vai script is a
syllabary, we know that whatever external influences were active in creating
pressure for an indigenous writing system, the form and articulation of that
system represented an original production." (p. 265) As Scribner noted, it
does not detract from the invention to realize that the Vai society had been
in contact for hundreds of years with both Arabic script (writing in both
Arabic and ajami) and Latin script carried used by afro-Portuguese traders.
Scribner suggests the development was pushed by impinging of Vai life of both
Latin and Arabic traditions in the 1820s when Christians began to push into
their region and the Vai began to accept Islam in numbers as Muslim Mandeka
marabout-traders became established in the sizable towns.
Why the difference in stories between Delafosse and the modern account by
Scribner (and the Univ of Liberia)? Recall, Delafosse was a high colonial
official in the nascent French empire. He had agendas, and the early work of
French administrator-ethnographers, while valuable, is widely recognized as
containing many pièges, traps for the unwary in terms of distortions or
blindnesses. Firstly, there was an agenda to deny as much as possible the
Islamic influences, as the Sahelian Jihad (muslim) states had given the
French the most ferocious armed opposition. For that, I find Delafosse’s
assertion (297-298) that he had never seen a Mande write in Arabic characters
in Mande highly suspicious –the so called Ajami texts-- as well as his desire
to pretend the Vai had not yet had contact with Arabic. I believe we can
discard these. Secondly, there is the element of anti-Anglo Saxonism. The
guides for both Kaelle and Forbes, the naval office, were apparently
–following Delafosse’s assertions here—Americo-Liberians, who Delafosse so
charitably writes have a "meprise imbecile" for their African confreres and
who are for him: "as everywhere, moreover, the Black called civilized, the
Liberian, is a calamity of which one must always carefully watch." Merci
chef, merci. Well, if we can leave aside the enlightening opinion of
Delafosse regarding civilized blacks such as myself, I think we can at least
take with much caution Delafosse’s critiques of the Bukele story.
Where to go then? Although I found Ms. Hau’s article tendentious in some
respects, she raised a very interesting hypothesis. Ms. Hau suggested that
an ideographic script was possible and further wrote: "it is unwise,
considering our lack of knowledge of Vai, Mende, Toma and Guerze to laugh off
suggestions made by some of these people that their leading secret society
[the Poro] had [ideographic] writing [at an early date]." (Hau 1973, p. 41)
There is something, rather much to be said for not dismissing the possibility
of a secret religious script analogous to the Ogham script (I hope those
familiar with Celtic early history will correct me if this is a poor analogy)
. Ms. Hau’s argument, properly framed as a hypthesis, although forcing her
arguments rather too faropens up a question which I think legitmately needs
further research. In regards to her suggestion, Scribner's analysis notes
the Vai writing roots in Mande graphic symbols as well as the Bambara's own
use of a secret set of 259 ideographic symbols available only to those at
high levels of secret societies. Scribner cites Dalby ("A Survey of
indigenous scripts of Liberia and Sierra Leone: Via, Mende, Loma, Kpelle and
Bassa." African Language Studies (Univ. of London) 1967 v. 8, p. 1-51; "The
Indigenous Scripts of West Africa and Surinam: their inspiration and design"
[ibid] 1968 v. 9, p. 156-197 and "The historical problems of the indigenous
scripts of West Africa and Surinam" in Dalby ed. Language and History in West
Africa. New York: Africana, 1979 and Delafosse "Vai leur langue et leur
systeme d'ecriture", L'Anthropologie 10, 1899),
Scribner further writes: "Early travelers, writing before the invention of
any of the known West African scripts, commented on the widespread use of
graphic symbols in ritual and ceremony in this region." (Scribner, p. 266)
But again, without archeological evidence, we can not postulate an early date
for the development of an actual writing system. Again, following P.F. de
Moraes Farias "The oldest extant writing of West Africa: medieval epigraphs
from Essuk, Saney and Egef-n-Tawaqqast (Mali)' Journal des africanistes LX
1990 65-113.) the earliest attested to writings are in an early form of the
Arabic script still popular in the Sahel and West Africa. But we can not we
exclude the idea of lost Mande scripts. Unlike Winters assertions of
definate knowledge, we have an intriguing possible research area, but no firm
knowledge.
Ramira Naka
ram...@geocities.com
In article <6ff6n4$1qc...@news.jps.net>,> In article <35331a05....@news.wxs.nl>,
> m...@wxs.nl (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal) wrote:
> >On Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:06:01 -0600, ke...@jps.net wrote:
> >
> >>I have copied his comparisons of the Berber and Vai characters, and it
> >>is available at this URL:
> >>
> >>http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple/9845/vai.htm
> >>
> >>the Berber alphabet and the Vai syllabary, and there are five fairly close
> >>matches in form and sound (of the consonant values). I would agree that the
> >>odds of this happening purely by coincidence are very low. Of course, this
> >>alone would not mean that Vai is an ancient script, but it helps Delafosse's
> >>argument.
> >
> >they definitely look Tifinagh-inspired. The number of matches in form
> >and sound is high enough to think that the creators of the Vai script
> >knew some Tuareg letters [it's not the Cherokee scenario], but the
> >number of mismatches (shape similar but totally different sound) would
> >suggest that they didn't know them really well.
> >
>
> a syllabic script to the type of inflection in Berber. That is, if
> Tuareg has this inflection (can't remember). They needed something
> consonantal or alphabetic. The Vai script is actually quite impressive
> with some 259 signs covering many aspects of vowel quality and
> intonation.
>
> Lhote and Galand. Maybe these hold the answer. These seemed to have been
> overlooked by other scholars who possibly could not read French, since the
> inscriptions did not translate into Tuareg or other Berber languages. I wonder
> if there are any more matches between Vai and these inscriptions.
>
> Paul Kekai Manansala
ke...@jps.net
In article <3538ec6f....@news.wxs.nl>,
m...@wxs.nl wrote:
>
> On Fri, 27 Mar 1998 10:45:38 -0600, cwin...@kiwi.dep.anl.gov wrote:
>
> > As I have tried to explain in earlier post the Libyco-Berber writing and
> >Tifinig are different scripts.
>
> Different but practically identical. See:
> http://alumni.eecs.berkeley.edu/~lorentz/Ancient_Scripts/berber.html
>
After looking at the ancient Libyan script there appear to be a few
more matches. One seems to have been missed by Delafosse as it
also is found in comparison with Tifinag:
1. The vertical "m" sign with Vai "me"
2. The vertical "s" sign with Vai "se" and "zo"
3. The "r" sign with Vai "re" and "le"
4. The ancient "S" with Vai "ze" and "zhe"
5. The vertical "Z" with Vai "so"
Four of these probably would not match with Tifinag, and Delafosse
did not see any resemblace. However, they are quite close to
the ancient Libyan signs. As there are only 25 signs (all consonants)
in the ancient script, it is very suggestive.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Mananasala
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
Akan Ifriqiya
In article <35496953....@news.wxs.nl>, m...@wxs.nl says...
>
>On Fri, 27 Mar 1998 19:41:36 -0600, ram...@geocities.com wrote:
>
>>[Wonderful posting]
>
>Merci beaucoup.
Disinformations irritate me.
Ramira Naka
Akan Ifriqiya
In article <6fgkua$3nf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, cwin...@kiwi.dep.anl.gov
says...
>
>In article <35331a05....@news.wxs.nl>,
> m...@wxs.nl wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:06:01 -0600, ke...@jps.net wrote:
>>
>> >I have copied his comparisons of the Berber and Vai characters, and it
>> >is available at this URL:
>> >
>> >http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Temple/9845/vai.htm
>> >
>> >Obviously, there are lots of matches (6) or near-matches (7)in form
between
>> >the Berber alphabet and the Vai syllabary, and there are five fairly
close
>> >matches in form and sound (of the consonant values). I would agree that
>the
>> >odds of this happening purely by coincidence are very low. Of course,
this
>> >alone would not mean that Vai is an ancient script, but it helps
>Delafosse's
>> >argument.
>>
>> Unless the other Vai signs have quite another "look and feel" I'd say
>> they definitely look Tifinagh-inspired. The number of matches in form
>> and sound is high enough to think that the creators of the Vai script
>> knew some Tuareg letters [it's not the Cherokee scenario], but the
>> number of mismatches (shape similar but totally different sound) would
>> suggest that they didn't know them really well.
>>
>> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
>> Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
>> m...@wxs.nl |_____________|||
>>
>> ========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
>>
>(Paris,1968,) and H. Lhote, Les Touaregs du Hoggar (Paris,1944, ) discussed
>both of these ancient-writing systems. Both Lhote (pp.141-145) and Galand
>(p.11) made it clear that Libyco-Berber inscriptions were definitely not
>written in Libyan (Punic, Numidian, etc.) or Taureg .
Did they. I would like to see you quote the exact text you pretend says
this. As we have seen in re Delafosse tu ne parle guere la langue francaise.
> In addition, the Vai script has different signs, which have the same
>meanings. This richness of the Vai syllabary makes it apparent that it was
>invented earlier than Tifinag.
In what way? What logic is this? The Berber Tifinagh is an alphabetic
script. The Vai is a syllabary. This statement is like saying oranges are
older than apples because they have more vitamin C.
Ramira Naka
Akan Ifriqiya
In article <6fhrgh$6mr$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, ke...@jps.net says...
>
>In article <3538ec6f....@news.wxs.nl>,
> m...@wxs.nl wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 27 Mar 1998 10:45:38 -0600, cwin...@kiwi.dep.anl.gov wrote:
>>
and
>> >Tifinig are different scripts.
>>
>> http://alumni.eecs.berkeley.edu/~lorentz/Ancient_Scripts/berber.html
>>
>
>
>After looking at the ancient Libyan script there appear to be a few
>more matches. One seems to have been missed by Delafosse as it
>also is found in comparison with Tifinag:
>
>1. The vertical "m" sign with Vai "me"
>2. The vertical "s" sign with Vai "se" and "zo"
>3. The "r" sign with Vai "re" and "le"
>4. The ancient "S" with Vai "ze" and "zhe"
>5. The vertical "Z" with Vai "so"
>
>Four of these probably would not match with Tifinag, and Delafosse
>did not see any resemblace. However, they are quite close to
>the ancient Libyan signs. As there are only 25 signs (all consonants)
>in the ancient script, it is very suggestive.
Is it? How do evaluate that among over 260 signs? And then, does not
Delafosse, our wonderfully out of date source have a point regarding the
inherent possible commonalities in a geometric script? I am partisan of the
Vai script as fully indigenous and je m'en fout with this constant eye
turning to the Sahara. However, perhaps we need a somewhat more systematic
and reasoned examination.
Ramira
Paul Kekai Manansala
Those interested in seeing the Vai syllabary can go to this address:
http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/Writing_Systems/VAI.html
Some of the variants and syllables from Delafosse's list are missing,
but this will give a good idea of what the script looks like.
The page was set up by Dr. Ayele Bekerie, an Ethiopian linguist at
Cornell who contributed to the Africentric argument during the athena-
discuss debate.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
Clyde A. Winters
5.100...@news.wxs.nl> <6fgkua$3nf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6fhun5$3k0...@news.jps.net>
Paul Kekai Manansala (ke...@jps.net) wrote:
: Those interested in seeing the Vai syllabary can go to this address:
: http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/Writing_Systems/VAI.html
: Regards,
: Paul Kekai Manansala
That's for the information Paul. Your Web page illustrating the Vai
characters and Berber writing was accurate. Moreover, on pp.297-298
Delafosse mentions that he consulted many literate Vai who claimed that
the Vai script was ancient. These Vai also told him that the Vai system
of writing was still being used in the mountains to the north.
Delafosse did not believe this claim. But he does mention the Vai
tradition for an ancient origin of the Vai writing.
The informants mentioned by Delafosse were correct. Many marks
similar to those contained in the Vai script were found in the
mountains further north in the Grotte de Goundaka and even the Sahara
which point to the ancient origin of the Vai inscriptions (See M.E.
Paris, "Recherches sur l'origine de marques di tribus", Bull de l'IFAN,
ser B.(1953) pp. 1619-1632; and G. Szumowski, "Vestiges prehistoriques
dans la region de Bandiagara", Notes Africaine, (1955) pp. 19-23).
The Vai tradition for an ancient origin of this syllabary recorded by
Delafosse was confirmed by Paris and Szumowski. This supports the view
of Hau and others that the Vai script was invented in ancient times.
C. A. Winters
Clyde A. Winters
5.100...@news.wxs.nl> <6fgkua$3nf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <3538ec6f....@news.wxs.nl> <6fgmrh$28s...@news.jps.net> <353d0663....@news.wxs.nl>
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal (m...@wxs.nl) wrote:
: On Fri, 27 Mar 98 17:15:29 GMT, ke...@jps.net (Paul Kekai Manansala)
: wrote:
: >Bernard posted this quote of O'Connor on Galand:
: >
: >"Second, no single Berber language can
: >be identified with the language of the script; thus the term łBerber˛ is
: >used here to refer to one or more unspecified languages not identified
: >with living tongues. Galand has gone so far as to propose that the script
: >is undeciphered, though he does not deny that it is alphabetic and that it
: >could be related to a Berber language. Most other scholars are not so
: >skeptical-- the Berber character of the ancient kingdoms is guaranteed by
: >the attested names..." (OąConnor 1996:113-114).
Thank you for this post. Here is is made clear by O'Connor that Galand
said that the LibycoBerber inscriptions were "undeciphered". This is
exactly what I said in my earlier post: Libyco-Berber is not a Berber
language.
: >
: >Thus, there is no claim that the inscriptions can be translated into
: >Berber. Just that the names of the "ancient kingdoms" have a "Berber
: >character." In fact, O'Connor states that the language cannot be
: >"identified with living tongues."
: Yes. Just like the Latin inscriptions cannot be related to any living
: variety of Romance.
: ==
: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
: Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
: m...@wxs.nl |_____________|||
: ========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
Please read what you post, if the language can not be identified with a
"living tongue " that means that it can not be read using Berber or
Tifinig. This invalidates your claim that the Libyco-Berber writing can
be read in a contemporary Berber language. In this passages you
contradict your own claim.
C.A. Winters
Akan Ifriqiya
In article <6fiqgo$1so$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu
says...
>
>5.100...@news.wxs.nl> <6fgkua$3nf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
<6fhun5$3k0_001@news.
>jps.net>
>
>Paul Kekai Manansala (ke...@jps.net) wrote:
>: Those interested in seeing the Vai syllabary can go to this address:
>
>: http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/Writing_Systems/VAI.html
>
>: Some of the variants and syllables from Delafosse's list are missing,
>: but this will give a good idea of what the script looks like.
>
>: The page was set up by Dr. Ayele Bekerie, an Ethiopian linguist at
>: Cornell who contributed to the Africentric argument during the athena-
>: discuss debate.
>
>: Regards,
>: Paul Kekai Manansala
>
>
>That's for the information Paul. Your Web page illustrating the Vai
>characters and Berber writing was accurate. Moreover, on pp.297-298
>Delafosse mentions that he consulted many literate Vai who claimed that
>the Vai script was ancient. These Vai also told him that the Vai system
>of writing was still being used in the mountains to the north.
Sorry but wrong my dear Winters. "Ancien" is not ancient. It is old. You
need to master french. The Vai cited by Delafosse claimed it was a couple of
centuries old, not thousands. Again this does not agree entirely with the
oral traditions currently collected. So evidently you desire to wieght a
19th c. colonial administrator over current tradition. Suivez vous les
maitres mon cher.
Ramira Naka
ram...@geocities.com
In article <6fir27$1so$2...@artemis.it.luc.edu>,
>
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal (m...@wxs.nl) wrote:
> : On Fri, 27 Mar 98 17:15:29 GMT, ke...@jps.net (Paul Kekai Manansala)
> : wrote:
>
> : >Bernard posted this quote of O'Connor on Galand:
> : >
> : >"Second, no single Berber language can
> : >be identified with the language of the script; thus the term łBerber˛ is
> : >used here to refer to one or more unspecified languages not identified
> : >with living tongues. Galand has gone so far as to propose that the script
> : >is undeciphered, though he does not deny that it is alphabetic and that it
> : >could be related to a Berber language. Most other scholars are not so
> : >skeptical-- the Berber character of the ancient kingdoms is guaranteed by
> : >the attested names..." (OąConnor 1996:113-114).
>
> Thank you for this post. Here is is made clear by O'Connor that Galand
> said that the LibycoBerber inscriptions were "undeciphered". This is
> exactly what I said in my earlier post: Libyco-Berber is not a Berber
> language.
Your ability to read selectively is amazing, as is your selection of sources.
Galand is in the minority and even he does not, as is clear right here, deny
that Libyco-Berber is Berber, only that it is decipherable. Est-ce que tu ne
lis meme pas l'anglais correctement mon cher?
> : >Thus, there is no claim that the inscriptions can be translated into
> : >Berber. Just that the names of the "ancient kingdoms" have a "Berber
> : >character." In fact, O'Connor states that the language cannot be
> : >"identified with living tongues."
>
> : Yes. Just like the Latin inscriptions cannot be related to any living
> : variety of Romance.
>
> : ==
> : Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
> : Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
> : m...@wxs.nl |_____________|||
>
> : ========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
>
> Please read what you post, if the language can not be identified with a
> "living tongue " that means that it can not be read using Berber or
> Tifinig. This invalidates your claim that the Libyco-Berber writing can
> be read in a contemporary Berber language. In this passages you
> contradict your own claim.
Tiresome, so very very tiresome. Why we have to treat these very simple
issues over and over again, I do not understand. Tifinagh is the current
Berber script, used by the Tamachek and others, a direct descendant of the
ancient script (voir le deux a cote, not mere 7 or 12 matches of several
hundred) . The claim, attested to by the general consensus, is that the
ancient script can be read as a Berber script, not that it can be read using
a modern Berber dialect, but then Miguel says that above. Disinformations.
Ramira Naka
ram...@geocities.com
In article <35258c2c...@news.wxs.nl>,
m...@wxs.nl wrote:
>
> On 25 Mar 1998 03:41:31 GMT, cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A.
> Winters) wrote:
>
> >In the rock art of Africa the Vai signs are not compounded.
>
> That's a bit of a problem then.
>
> > The Olmec signs are usually read from the outside in. In the
> >example I gave in the original post I first deciphered the box figure
> >which is Po=pure. Then I read the characters inside the central figure.
>
> And that's a bit of a problem too. In Bambara, "you great king" would
> be, if I'm not mistaken, "YOU KING GREAT" ("i masa ba"), with the
> adjective last, not first. Ramira?
Sorry, I lost this for a while. Yes, I think that is the usual way.
I will add, for the limited anectdotal value it has, that showing Winters
Mande/Bambara "transcription" to my cousine, a native speaker and university
educated, she first asked me "What language is this" I asked her to read it
as Mande or Bambara. She said it is no "Bambara" which she is familiar with,
but allowed for the idea that perhaps Mr. Winters has a deeper understanding
of her language than she. Again, I only offer this little nugget for a sense
that something is not right in this "transcription" from a native speaker's
viewpoint, but will also point out my cousine is not trained in
linguistics.....
> So what we have so far is: it's not proper Vai-script (which is 19th
> c. anyway), it's not proper Mande syntax, the obvious sign for "7" is
> translated as "(of) the Se Gyo" [whatever that means], and there's
> still those two unexplained mismatches in the numbering of the signs.
> Doesn't look good...
>
> ==
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
> Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
> m...@wxs.nl |_____________|||
>
> ========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
>
Paul Kekai Manansala
In article <6fiqgo$1so$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>,>5.100...@news.wxs.nl> <6fgkua$3nf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6fhun5$3k0...@news.jps.net>
>
>Paul Kekai Manansala (ke...@jps.net) wrote:
>: Those interested in seeing the Vai syllabary can go to this address:
>
>: http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/Writing_Systems/VAI.html
>
>: Some of the variants and syllables from Delafosse's list are missing,
>: but this will give a good idea of what the script looks like.
>
>: The page was set up by Dr. Ayele Bekerie, an Ethiopian linguist at
>: Cornell who contributed to the Africentric argument during the athena-
>: discuss debate.
>
>: Regards,
>: Paul Kekai Manansala
>
>
>That's for the information Paul. Your Web page illustrating the Vai
>characters and Berber writing was accurate. Moreover, on pp.297-298
>Delafosse mentions that he consulted many literate Vai who claimed that
>the Vai script was ancient. These Vai also told him that the Vai system
>of writing was still being used in the mountains to the north.
>
>tradition for an ancient origin of the Vai writing.
>
Funny how the claim of one man to have "invented" the script is accepted,
while the whole tradition of the society is not. Having some familiarity
with secret societies in another part of the world, I know that if someone
had invented the script in such socieites they would have achieved culture
hero status. But the Vai don't even recognize the man mentioned by Forbes.
> The informants mentioned by Delafosse were correct. Many marks
>similar to those contained in the Vai script were found in the
>mountains further north in the Grotte de Goundaka and even the Sahara
>which point to the ancient origin of the Vai inscriptions (See M.E.
>Paris, "Recherches sur l'origine de marques di tribus", Bull de l'IFAN,
>ser B.(1953) pp. 1619-1632; and G. Szumowski, "Vestiges prehistoriques
>dans la region de Bandiagara", Notes Africaine, (1955) pp. 19-23).
>
Are there any date estimates for these marks? It might be while before
I can examine these citations. How close were they to the Vai signs?
>The Vai tradition for an ancient origin of this syllabary recorded by
>Delafosse was confirmed by Paris and Szumowski. This supports the view
>of Hau and others that the Vai script was invented in ancient times.
>
You also mentioned before some inscriptions found by Wulsin (in Ghana?)
dating back to about 3000 BCE. According to the notes I've read, the
Libyan script is supposed to date to about 600 BCE, but this is just
a rough estimate. From the extra signs that closely match the ancient
Libyan script, I have to agree that it is related to the Vai script.
Have of the Vai signs not found in either the ancient Libyan or Tifinag
consonantal systems been found in the old inscriptions you mention.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
ke...@jps.net
In article <6fir27$1so$2...@artemis.it.luc.edu>,
cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A. Winters) wrote:
>
> 5.100...@news.wxs.nl> <6fgkua$3nf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
<353d0663....@news.wxs.nl>
>
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal (m...@wxs.nl) wrote:
> : On Fri, 27 Mar 98 17:15:29 GMT, ke...@jps.net (Paul Kekai Manansala)
> : wrote:
>
> : >Bernard posted this quote of O'Connor on Galand:
> : >
> : >"Second, no single Berber language can
> : >be identified with the language of the script; thus the term łBerber˛ is
> : >used here to refer to one or more unspecified languages not identified
> : >with living tongues. Galand has gone so far as to propose that the script
> : >is undeciphered, though he does not deny that it is alphabetic and that
it
> : >could be related to a Berber language. Most other scholars are not so
> : >skeptical-- the Berber character of the ancient kingdoms is guaranteed by
> : >the attested names..." (OąConnor 1996:113-114).
>
> Thank you for this post. Here is is made clear by O'Connor that Galand
> said that the LibycoBerber inscriptions were "undeciphered". This is
> exactly what I said in my earlier post: Libyco-Berber is not a Berber
> language.
The interesting thing is that all these scripts including Punic and
Canaanite appear to trace back to the early Egyptian script (or are
at least related).
We know that the earliest evidence of writing in Egypt occurs in
Southern Egypt and Lower Nubia among people who seem related
to the African Aqualithic. This is supported by the tradition
at Edfu that the first Egyptian dynasty was founded by the Mesniu
"Harpooners" and the harpoon symbol figures prominently in royal
pre-dynastic markings. The harpoon symbol is found at Qustul,
proto-dynastic Naqada and on the Narmer palette. The African
Aqualithic was distinguished by its use of harpoon heads for
aquatic mammal hunting. They also depended largely on fishing
for food.
The early pottery used in Egypt was similar to the wavy line and black
and red pottery of the African Aqualithic. They subsisted largely on
fish as evidenced by the quantities of fish bones associated
with early Egyptian pottery finds.
A 1st dynasty jar that was a joint evolution of wavy line and wavy handled
pottery is inscribed with the name of Narmer.
One can speculate that any developement of writing among the African
Aqualithic people would have spread just like other elements of their
culture along the southern Sahara, the Sahel and the Sudan. Although,
the first signs of syllabic and alphabetic writing do not appear until
a relatively late period that doesn't mean such systems were not
created earlier.
At Dr. Bekerie's site there is also a listing of a few Nsibidi pictographic
script. Jonathan Olumide Lucas connected this script with its numerous
characters to ancient Egyptian pictographic writing (_Religions in West
Africa and ancient Egypt_ [Apapa: Nigerian National Press, 1970). I
haven't been able to check out his references yet, though.
Maybe these African writing systems do trace back to the African Aqualithic's
connection with the founding of early Egyptian dynasties.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
Clyde A. Winters
: >
No, but they are believed to have preceeded the Vai script popularized
after 1833.
: Are there any date estimates for these marks? It might be while before
: I can examine these citations. How close were they to the Vai signs?
: >The Vai tradition for an ancient origin of this syllabary recorded by
: >Delafosse was confirmed by Paris and Szumowski. This supports the view
: >of Hau and others that the Vai script was invented in ancient times.
: >
: You also mentioned before some inscriptions found by Wulsin (in Ghana?)
: dating back to about 3000 BCE. According to the notes I've read, the
: Libyan script is supposed to date to about 600 BCE, but this is just
: a rough estimate. From the extra signs that closely match the ancient
: Libyan script, I have to agree that it is related to the Vai script.
This is an important point that must be pointed out, when people talk
about Libyan writing they are talking about the Punic and Numidian
writing. The proper name for the earlier writing is called
Libyco-Berber.
The inscriptions recored by Wulsin were depicted inside of a ram,
which represented among the ancient Saharans the god Amman/ Amon, etc.
from Oued Mertoutek. The most interesting fact about some of the
Saharan inscriptions is the recording of the ancient Mande habitation
sign called Kangaba found throughout the Sahara and the Grotte
Goundaka.
: Have of the Vai signs not found in either the ancient Libyan or Tifinag
: consonantal systems been found in the old inscriptions you mention.
: Regards,
: Paul Kekai Manansala
As you have pointed out in earlier post anyone interested in finding
out the truth about the references we cite must read them themselves.
Some people will be directed to a specific page in a text and come back
talking about something that had little if anything to do with the
original post. I highly recommend that the readers of this ng check
out the sources themselves because some people will falsify "facts" to
decieve the public.
C.A. Winters
ram...@geocities.com
In article <6fj0pa$lk_...@news.jps.net>,
False, false false. The Vai *do* recognize Duala. It is part of their oral
traditions. If one does not rely solely on the highly problematic account of
a french colonial administrator (whose questioning of the Forbes account lies
with a racist questioning of the knowlege of the Americo-Liberian(s) he
presumes were Forbes' guides and a more than slight does of anti-Anglo saxon
feeling --this by the way is my area of specialty) for one's sourcing one
would know that. Delafosse is not without his baggage,frere. Indeed the
University of Liberia presents an account of the Vai script invention more or
less the same as the Scribner account. Perhaps our Liberian brothers are
brain-washed?
What is also noted is that there are other claims on the invetion or
development of the script, analagous to the Duala claim. And to repeat,
according to Delafosse's own problematic account, the elders who he
interviews claim c. 1890 the script was a couple hundred years old. Ancien,
to repeat, does not mean ancient. It means old. (we do not have citations
on this so the rather sweeping generalizations by Delafosse strike me as
something to be cautious about, indeed he denies that the Vai were converting
to Islam at the time, which was wrong. Why you are so quick to accept
Delafosse where it suites you, but ignore the general gist of his writing I
do not understand, other than it appears idealogy runs before facts.
Snipped the rest of the disinformations.
Ramira Naka
ram...@geocities.com
In article <6fje6r$dih$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>,> : In article <6fiqgo$1so$1...@artemis.it.luc.edu>,
> : cwi...@orion.it.luc.edu (Clyde A. Winters) wrote:
> : >5.100...@news.wxs.nl> <6fgkua$3nf$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6fhun5$3k0...@news.jps.net>
> : >
> : >Paul Kekai Manansala (ke...@jps.net) wrote:
> : >: Those interested in seeing the Vai syllabary can go to this address:
> : >
> : >: http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/Writing_Systems/VAI.html
> : >
> : >: Some of the variants and syllables from Delafosse's list are missing,
> : >: but this will give a good idea of what the script looks like.
> : >
> : >: The page was set up by Dr. Ayele Bekerie, an Ethiopian linguist at
> : >: Cornell who contributed to the Africentric argument during the athena-
> : >: discuss debate.
> : >
> : >: Regards,
> : >: Paul Kekai Manansala
> : >
> : >
> : >That's for the information Paul. Your Web page illustrating the Vai
> : >characters and Berber writing was accurate. Moreover, on pp.297-298
> : >Delafosse mentions that he consulted many literate Vai who claimed that
> : >the Vai script was ancient. These Vai also told him that the Vai system
> : >of writing was still being used in the mountains to the north.
> : >
> : > Delafosse did not believe this claim. But he does mention the Vai
> : >tradition for an ancient origin of the Vai writing.
> : >
>
> : Funny how the claim of one man to have "invented" the script is accepted,
> : while the whole tradition of the society is not. Having some familiarity
> : with secret societies in another part of the world, I know that if someone
> : had invented the script in such socieites they would have achieved culture
> : hero status. But the Vai don't even recognize the man mentioned by Forbes.
>
> : >similar to those contained in the Vai script were found in the
> : >mountains further north in the Grotte de Goundaka and even the Sahara
> : >which point to the ancient origin of the Vai inscriptions (See M.E.
> : >Paris, "Recherches sur l'origine de marques di tribus", Bull de l'IFAN,
> : >ser B.(1953) pp. 1619-1632; and G. Szumowski, "Vestiges prehistoriques
> : >dans la region de Bandiagara", Notes Africaine, (1955) pp. 19-23).
> : >
>
> No, but they are believed to have preceeded the Vai script popularized
> after 1833.
>
> : Are there any date estimates for these marks? It might be while before
> : I can examine these citations. How close were they to the Vai signs?
>
> : >The Vai tradition for an ancient origin of this syllabary recorded by
> : >Delafosse was confirmed by Paris and Szumowski. This supports the view
> : >of Hau and others that the Vai script was invented in ancient times.
> : >
>
> : You also mentioned before some inscriptions found by Wulsin (in Ghana?)
> : dating back to about 3000 BCE. According to the notes I've read, the
> : Libyan script is supposed to date to about 600 BCE, but this is just
> : a rough estimate. From the extra signs that closely match the ancient
> : Libyan script, I have to agree that it is related to the Vai script.
>
> This is an important point that must be pointed out, when people talk
> about Libyan writing they are talking about the Punic and Numidian
> writing. The proper name for the earlier writing is called
> Libyco-Berber.
Smoke and mirrors, you are wrong, that has been demonstrated and yet you
continue to make the pretension you have a leg to stand on. Libyco Berber
*is* the Numidian script, derived from Punic origins. Quel menteur.
> The inscriptions recored by Wulsin were depicted inside of a ram,
> which represented among the ancient Saharans the god Amman/ Amon, etc.
> from Oued Mertoutek. The most interesting fact about some of the
> Saharan inscriptions is the recording of the ancient Mande habitation
> sign called Kangaba found throughout the Sahara and the Grotte
> Goundaka.
>
> : Have of the Vai signs not found in either the ancient Libyan or Tifinag
> : consonantal systems been found in the old inscriptions you mention.
>
> : Regards,
> : Paul Kekai Manansala
>
> As you have pointed out in earlier post anyone interested in finding
> out the truth about the references we cite must read them themselves.
> Some people will be directed to a specific page in a text and come back
> talking about something that had little if anything to do with the
> original post. I highly recommend that the readers of this ng check
> out the sources themselves because some people will falsify "facts" to
> decieve the public.
Indeed, such as yourself, who cannot seem to come up with a single extended
quote when asked, in any context. If you believe I have falsified Delafosse,
go to it and post the French and the English. On y va frere, nous voyons
voir eh non? Or is it after that ever so embarassing Sahib encounter you do
not wish to speak directly, eh no, Sahibi?