Minoan Crete Forever

Not really; you might get one word out of maybe a whole page of text. Compare our word/verb for writing in Archaic Greek meant something stupid, like "drawing a line through the sand" or our word for weather means "God's time" (i.e. not clock time) in Archaic.

I don't know about them being related to the Jews, but they sure as Hell weren't Indo-European; that much is for certain.

Ah well. (and 'Byzantine greek' is easier?)

You know, not just jews lived there, and so beyond the region... I heard they where more tied to 'easterners', as pointed up.
 

Kosta

Banned
Ah well. (and 'Byzantine greek' is easier?)

You know, not just jews lived there, and so beyond the region... I heard they where more tied to 'easterners', as pointed up.

The Archaic Greek period ends at about like the 300s BC. Mediaeval Greek goes from like the foundation of the Eastern Empire to like early-modern Greek. So by far Medieval is easy to read. It was during this period, too, that many words were bothered from other languages, primarily from Latin, words that didn't exist in Archaic.

I've read about one article and saw one thing on the Discovery Channel about them. If I had a Euro for every fact that I knew about the Minoans, I'd like have four Euro...
 
The fact they didn't fortify cities is going to be a huge problem.

But on the other hand, I support any TL that ends with compulsory female toplessness in the modern world.
 
The fact they didn't fortify cities is going to be a huge problem.
Not, if the conqueror adapts the culture (including language) of the conquered.
But on the other hand, I support any TL that ends with compulsory female toplessness in the modern world.
;)
I try to imagine an Age of Imperialism in which European missionaries force women in the colonies to uncover their breasts instead covering them.
 
Sorry for necromancing this, but I've been reading too much about Minoans to leave this alone.

The fact they didn't fortify cities is going to be a huge problem.
I think there's increasing evidence for Minoan fortifications. And in any case, their navy was probably a wall of its own.

Also, there's actually some plausible evidence the Minoan language may have been Indo-European after all. According to at least one guy who's reliable (not a fringe scientist) Linear A and B are 90% similar, phonetically speaking. That is, the sounds represented by the scripts are mostly the same with a 10% difference. So with the limited reading ability for Linear A, it provides enough evidence to assume it might be an Indo-European language, but of a different sort than Greek, rather it has more similarities with Sanskrit and Armenian. At least, this is the conclusion of this site. It seems plausible enough, although I will admit I know little to nothing of linguistics, it seems quite believable and for the purposes of an AH thread it might be best to go with this.

However, one question I did have is how similar were Mycenaean and Minoan cultures? Would it be reasonable to assume they had similar forms of rulership to some degree? Because I've been able to find details on how Mycenaean society was organized according to Linear B tablets, but nothing on Minoan. All the wiki is telling me in regards to this is that when the Mycenaeans took Crete they adopted many forms of Minoan culture, maybe even the bureaucracy.

As to how they survive, maybe just handwave the Thera eruption away, assume their navy remains intact, allowing them to continue on their trading ways. Perhaps they might establish a thalassocracy like that of King Minos in the story of Theseus, if this wasn't already the reality. If they maintain amiable enough relations with the Mycenaeans perhaps the Dorian invasion is averted outright, although this will massively change what Greece is like. Would be interesting to theorize on the possibilities of a continued Mycenaean civilization ruling mainland Greece and a continued Minoan civilization ruling the Aegean.
 
Also, there's actually some plausible evidence the Minoan language may have been Indo-European after all. According to at least one guy who's reliable (not a fringe scientist) Linear A and B are 90% similar, phonetically speaking. That is, the sounds represented by the scripts are mostly the same with a 10% difference.
Yes, and the Finnish alphabet and the French one are 90% similar, phonetically speaking. So what?

So with the limited reading ability for Linear A, it provides enough evidence to assume it might be an Indo-European language,
So Finnish is an Indo-European language? ????

The SCRIPTS have nothing to do with the LANGUAGE. In fact, Linear B is exceedingly ill suited to Greek. Its syllabics just don't work for Greek. You get the equivalent of writing English using Japanese Kana characters (so e.g. the Manga character Black Jack is ブラック・ジャック (Burakku Jakku)

but of a different sort than Greek, rather it has more similarities with Sanskrit and Armenian. At least, this is the conclusion of this site. It seems plausible enough, although I will admit I know little to nothing of linguistics, it seems quite believable and for the purposes of an AH thread it might be best to go with this.
I went to the site, and quickly looking a a couple of pages, see nothing that supports that claim. Where on that site is there such a claim?

Given the thousands and thousands of hours and hundreds of experts who have, over the last century, tried to decipher Linear A, or make any sense of it, for someone to suddenly claim it's Indo-European makes no sense at all. If it were ANYTHING we know well (Indo-European, Semitic, Turkic, etc), SOMEONE would have figured it out by now.

However, one question I did have is how similar were Mycenaean and Minoan cultures? Would it be reasonable to assume they had similar forms of rulership to some degree? Because I've been able to find details on how Mycenaean society was organized according to Linear B tablets, but nothing on Minoan. All the wiki is telling me in regards to this is that when the Mycenaeans took Crete they adopted many forms of Minoan culture, maybe even the bureaucracy.

Umm... You've got Greek barbarians squatting in the ruins of Minoan civilization. Sure, there's some connexion, and lots of borrowing. A West European version of the question would be "How similar were Germanic and Roman cultures? Would it be reasonable to assume they had similar forms of rulership to some degree?"

So, not much, IMO.
 
*sigh* If you would read more carefully instead of being pedantic or whatever, you will notice I did not say the similarity was the proof, just that if offered some ability to actually read the language and possibly work out the words and stuff. Here's a document for you.
 
Dathi THorfinnsson has a point with the writing-speech connection: P'urhépecha has many phonological similarities to Germanic languages yet they are completely unrelated while Bengali is distantly related to the English yet it has a rather alien (to English speakers) phonology and a slightly exotic (to English speakers) grammar. This lack of connection between phonetic writing systems (All living systems besides the Chinese Character based scripts, which are mostly logogrammic) can be exemplified by the fact that I regularly write the English Language in a slightly modified Perso-Arabic Abjad: ال کویک براون فاَخ جعمپس ۆۏ‎عر ال لێیزی براون داَگ (Arabic English)=The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy brown dog (Standard English Orthography)=Al Kwîk braûn fåx djɂmps ovɂr al leîzî dåg (Transliteration of Arabic English.) Basically, I could write Classical Arabic in Egyptian Hieroglyphics, rather easily in fact due to their similar phonologies and the fact that they both have similar grammars being Afro-Asiatic Languages, or a Chinese Language in the Arabic Abjad (which has been done); indeed, I would argue that a modified form of Devanagari is better suited to writing English than the Standard Orthography, as is my personal use of Arabic English.

EDIT: My Arabic English did not come out as it was supposed to, thus I apologize. Anyways, what is more important than finding out how a language sounded is what it means: We know far more about the Jurchens and the Khitans due to their use of logogrammic Sinograms than the Etruscans or the people of Meroë in no small part for the simple reason that, while we pretty much know how Etruscan and Meroitic were pronounced, we know little of what we are saying when we read their ancient texts; by contrast, if we did not have Manchu as a guide for Jurchen Pronounciation, of which little comparable exists for Khitan, we would not have a clue on how to pronounce it, much like our tiny knowledge of Khitan Phonology; yet, despite not knowing how to pronounce either of the 2 languages with much certainty, we know what they meant, even in the case of the lesser known Khitan, rather well.
 
Last edited:
Dathi THorfinnsson has a point with the writing-speech connection: P'urhépecha has many phonological similarities to Germanic languages yet they are completely unrelated while Bengali is distantly related to the English yet it has a rather alien (to English speakers) phonology and a slightly exotic (to English speakers) grammar. This lack of connection between phonetic writing systems (All living systems besides the Chinese Character based scripts, which are mostly logogrammic) can be exemplified by the fact that I regularly write the English Language in a slightly modified Perso-Arabic Abjad: ال کویک براون فاَخ جعمپس ۆۏ‎عر ال لێیزی براون داَگ (Arabic English)=The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy brown dog (Standard English Orthography)=Al Kwîk braûn fåx djɂmps ovɂr al leîzî dåg (Transliteration of Arabic English.) Basically, I could write Classical Arabic in Egyptian Hieroglyphics, rather easily in fact due to their similar phonologies and the fact that they both have similar grammars being Afro-Asiatic Languages, or a Chinese Language in the Arabic Abjad (which has been done); indeed, I would argue that a modified form of Devanagari is better suited to writing English than the Standard Orthogra
Well the thing is though the Indo-European theory is one of the only plausible ones there is, and given that genetic testing revealed that they immigrated from Anatolia it's a good, logical possibility with perhaps some evidence for it. In my mind it's quite easily the strongest theory there is as to the Minoan language. It's possible that it's not Indo-European, but there isn't nearly enough evidence to assume so just off the bat.
 
Top