Exhaustive Linear A lexicon of 1030 New Minoan and Old Minoan words, with extensive

sectional commentaries

This Linear A Lexicon of 1030 New Minoan, Pre-Greek substratum and Old Minoan
vocabulary is the largest ever to be published in history. While Prof. John G. Younger’s Linear
A Reverse Lexicon [1] ostensibly contains over 900 words, in actuality it does not. It includes
so many terms containing numeric syllabograms (*034 *047 *118 *305 *306 *308 *310 *311
*312 *529 *532 *3011 etc.), none of which can be phonetically deciphered, that the actual
number of intact Linear A words is considerably lower. Moreover, single syllabograms such as
a da di ka ke ni ra & te, the majority of which are almost certainly not words, broken strings
of syllabograms (e.g. *118-A-•-DA, *301-A, JU-•-DA+*309c, I-ZU-I-•-•-NU-KU-PA-NA-KU-
JU, MA-RI-•-I, RE-•-DU-TE-TE-KI-DI-A, RO+RO+*504 etc.), words truncated, left, right or
on both sides and strings greater than 15 syllabograms drive the sum total even lower, leaving
us with a lexicon consisting of only 774 intact Linear A words, with the emphasis squarely on
intact. The question remains, how could Prof. Younger have missed so many Linear A words?
On the other hand, this Comprehensive Linear A Lexicon consists of intact 1030 terms,
exclusive of the disqualified entries listed above.

This lexicon comprises all of the intact words in John G. Younger’s Linear A Reverse Lexicon
(which is far from comprehensive) plus every last intact word on every tablet facsimile at his
site, wherever any of the latter are not found in the former, along with a good deal of
additional Linear vocabulary I have discovered on my own. Since Prof. Younger, founding his
data on the statistical surveys by Louis Godart and Jean-Pierre Olivier (to whom he ascribes
the bizarre acronym, Gorila) has already realized a thoroughly detailed cross-contextual and
cross-tabular data analysis of around 3/4 of the Linear A repertoire, I see no need to rehash
his research here, in others words, to re-invent the wheel. It is for this reason that I have
entirely abstained from repeating the statistical data enumerating all of the tablets on which
each and every Linear A word he has isolated appears, with the exceptions I have singled out
above. For all such statistical data I refer the reader to Prof. Younger’s site. As for the 226
additional Linear A words, for which I have not yet established statistical data concerning
their appearance once or more than once on Linear A tablets, I intend to make up for these
lacunae in a data-based tabular study of Linear A vocabulary in the near future. I also need
scarcely point out that the vast majority of Linear A words appear on just one or two tablets or
fragments, yet another cogent reason why it is a waste of time rehashing their original tabular
context(s) here. To find any Linear A word in context which appears only once in Prof.
Younger’s Lexicon, search for it there in the following format: a-ka-ru, de-pa, ra-na-tu-su etc.

Words which are apparent variants of one another are listed under one entry, e.g.
daka/daki/daku/dakuna/dakusene(ti); japa/japadi/japaku;kira/kiro/kirisi/kiru;
maru/maruku/maruri; merasasaa/merasasaja; nesa/nesaki/nesakimi; piku/pikui/pikuzu;
reda/redamija/redana/redasi; saro/saru/sarutu; tami/tamia/tamisi;
zare/zaredu/zareki/zaresea

The following entries have been deliberately omitted:

1. words containing any syllabograms which are either partially or wholly numeric, since we
do not know what the phonetic values of these syllabograms are,
2. Linear A “words” truncated on the left, the right on on both sides,
3. broken series of syllabograms &

1
4. agglutinated strings of syllabograms > than 15 characters, of which there are very few.
Refer to Appendix 1 for the statistical incidence of the number of times each intact Linear A
word of the 774 I have extrapolated from Prof. Younger’s Reverse Linear A lexicon appears on
Linear A tablets or fragments, ranging from 2-8 to 10, 11, 18 & 30 times respectively. I have
omitted all the vocables occurring only once, since any word which does not occur more than
once appears by default once only. Ergo, any word you find in the Lexicon of 1030 words
below, which does not appear in Appendix 1 must by default appear only once in Linear A.
The percentage of words out of 1030 appearing only once is astronomically high, 89.4 %. This
is one of the paramount reasons why all of this vocabulary is so stubbornly recalcitrant to
decipherment. Want of context is another key factor. While a large number of the 89.4 %
words do appear alongside other words, most of the latter are also single-incidence exograms,
and even when other words to which any one of the 89.4 % is adjacent are at least potentially
decipherable, we are still left largely in the dark when it comes to deciphering the meaning of
most of the 89.4 %. But what about the remaining 10.6 %? Are these more readily
decipherable? The short answer is, it depends. There are many explanations why
decipherment of the latter is a tricky endeavour. The Commentaries on each type of exogram,
Mycenaean-derived New Minoan (NM1), pre-Greek substratum, topomastics and epomastics,
Old Minoan (OM) and ligatured logograms, go a long way towards resolving most if not all the
issues surrounding the decipherment of the 10.6 % more accessible Linear A vocabulary. But
the situation is far from hopeless where at least some words ― actually quite a few ―
occurring only once are concerned. Quite often enough, decipherable words falling in the
range of 10.6 % actually enhance the chances of our being able to decipher, however
tentatively, at least some of the remaining 89.4 %. Here again, the Commentaries serve to
shed light on the intricacies of Linear A decipherment at all levels.

KEYS:
1. New Minoan:
NM1 = Mycenaean-derived New Minoan. Levels of probability: NM1 = highly probable or
certain. NM2 = probable. While there are more candidates at NM2 = probable, I have omitted
these from this Lexicon, as they are less likely to withstand the test of contextual
verisimilitude once correlated with the tablets on which they appear.
MOS = The code MOS following a New Minoan NM1 entry indicates that the Mycenaean-
derived New Minoan term in question was independently researched by Prof. Yuriy Mosenkis,
without whose timely indispensable contributions to the field this Lexicon would have never
come to fruition.
Mosenkis (sources):
MOSA Greek grammar in Linear A
MOSB Indo-European Greek Morphology in Linear A
MOSC GREEK WRITTEN LANGUAGE FROM 3000 BC
MOSD ‘MINOAN GREEK’ DIALECT: MORPHOLOGY
MOSE MINOAN GREEK FARMING IN LINEAR A
MOSF Fates of Cretan slaves in the Linear A tablet HT 7
MOSG Greek names of sum and debt in Linear A

2. PGS = pre-Greek substratum

3. ONO = onomastics, personal names + TOP = topomastics, place names
NOTE: Some place names are derived from the Minoan Language Blog,

2
http://minoablog.blogspot.ca/2010/08/pre-greek-place-names-of-aegean.html

4. OM = Old Minoan, i.e. the Minoan language substratum. NOTE that I assign this KEY only
to Old Minoan words I have been able to decipher or tentatively decipher to date + OMNM1 =
any word which is a composite of Old Minoan and New Minoan. Old Minoan words I have
been unable to decipher do not bear the code OM.

5. LIG = ligatured logograms

Definitions for the all of the KEY terminology follow this Lexicon. Italicized numbers in
increments of 5 following entries indicate decipherments or tentative decipherments.

adai
adakisika NM1 a0dakissi/ka = adorned with ivory
adara/adaro/adaru OM having to do with the measurement of grain crops
ade/adu OM = large unit of measurement for grains, something like bales?
adoro MOSB NM1 a1doroj = receiving no gifts; unpaid; giving no gifts
Adunitana TOP
adureza OM = dry unit of measurement, usually for grains 5
aduza
ajesa
aju = 10
Akanu/Akanuzati PGS TOP A0rxa/nej = Archanes (Crete)
aka -or- kaa LIG NM1 a0ska/ (arch. acc.) <- a0sko/j = leather bag, wine skin
ake -or- kae LIG
akara/akaru NM1 a1kra (arch. acc.) - or - = end, border + akaru a0gro/j = field
aki/akii OM = garlic
akipiete(ne?) OM in common, shared, allotted? Cf. Linear B kekemena kotoina = small plot of
allotted land 10
akiro NM1 a1kairoj = not in season, unseasonable -or- a1grioj = living in the fields;
uncultivated, unreclaimed
akumina PGS a0ku/mina = without cumin? (arch. acc.)
ama
amaja NM1 a3maca= wagon 20
amawasi NM1 a3mai#asi = with violets
amidao/amidau OM = something to do with rams 15
amita
ana
Ananusijase ONO
anatu
anau
anepiti
aparane
apaki NM1 a0parxh/ = first part of a sacfirice, firstlings for sacrifice, first-fruits = 30
apero PGS a1mpeloj = a vine Cf. Linear B apero
api
ara NM1 a0ra/ = a prayer

3
araju NM1 a0ra=u <- a0ra=oj = prayed for 20
arako NM1 a0ra/c = weaver Cf. Linear B arakateya a0laka/teiai = weavers
arakokuzu OMNM1 = weaver’s establishment? (agglutinative)
aranare/aranarai
arati NM1 a0ra=ti/ <- a0ra/toj = with something unblessed Cf. makarite ― below
aratiatu
aratu = 40
arauda
aredai
arekinedisa(?)ma (agglutinative)
Arenesidi ONO?
aresana NM1 a1leisana <- a1leison = an embossed cup (arch. acc.) = de/paj (Homeric) Cf.
Linear B dipa/arisu NM1 a1leisu <- a1leison = embossed cup
ari/arinita
arisu OM = cow or bull or ox, permuted. See also qaqaru, riruma 25
arokaku NM1 a1ro xalku/ = o0rei/xalkoj, oreikhalkos (from o1roj, oros, mountain and xalko/j
chalkos, copper), meaning “mountain copper”. Cf. Linear B kako xalko/j. See Appendix 3
aro/arote /aru NM1 a1lon (acc., no nom.) <- au=loc = furrow, ploughed land, corn-land
arura NM1 a0rou/ra = unit of land -or- plough Cf. Linear B arura = 50
arudara MOSE NM1 a1lutra <- a1lutron = threshing instrument (arch. acc.)
aruma
aruqaro
asadaka MOSE NM1 a1staxa (arch. acc.) <- a1staxu (Minoan nom. sing.)= ear of corn
asamune
Asara2 TOP = Linear B Asaro A0sa/roj -or- may refer to Assur, hence Assyria, according to
Daniel Rocha -or- asara2 (asarai) = without flax 30
asasumaino (agglutinative)
Asasumaise TOP? (agglutinative)
ase/asi
aseja = 60
asesina OM = sowing or harvesting
asidatoi NM1 a0si/datoi = without pomegranate (dat. sing.)
asijaka
asikira
asisupoa
asona
Asuja TOP Cf Linear B Asiwiya A0si/#ia
asupuwa
atade NM1 a1ttade = from father 35
atanate NM1 a0qa/na=te = without an immortal (instr. sing.) 70
atare NM1 a0ta=lei/ <- a0ta=lo/j = tender; delicate (of crops?) -or- a0qa/lei <- a0qa/loj = without a
branch, twig; without an olive branch -or- MOS NM1 a9dro/j = full-grown – or – a0qa/rh =
groats, meal, green fodder, forage, provender Cf. kupari = galingale
ati
atika NM1? au0t/ika= = immediately
atiru NM1? a0te/lu <- a0te/loj = without boundaries
atu

4
aurete
awapi
azura

daa
dadai/dadana = 80
dadipatu
dadumata OM = harvesting? -or- grain(s) measured? 40
dadumina/dadumine OM= related to harvesting?
dai/daina
Daipita TOP
dajute
daka/daki/daku/dakuna
dakusene(ti) (agglutinative)
damate PGS NM1 Da/mate = Damater Cf. Linear B Damate -or- da/matei = in the village
dame/dami/daminu OM dame = a type of grain -or- NM1 da/mei = in the village 90
danasi
danekuti
daqaqa
daqera OM = a type of vase?
dare NM1 da=lei/ <- da=lo/j = (with) a firebrand or torch/daro LIG NM1 da=lo/j = firebrand 45
darida OM = large vase, slightly smaller than a pithos
daropa OM = stirrup jar
darunete
daserate
dasi = 100
datapa
datara/datare NM1 da=ta/ra da=ta/rei <- da=th/rioj = distributing, for distribution -or- OM
sacred grove of olive trees
data2 (datai) OM = olive
datu OM = olive tree 50
Dawa OM = place name Cf. LB dawo Da/#oj / Da/#on
daweda OM = a kind of vase
dea
deauwase
dedi
dejuku = 110
deka -or- kade LIG
Demirirema ONO? (agglutinative)
depa/depu PGS de/paj de/pu (acc.?)= cup Cf. Linear B dipa di/paj & Homeric de/pa
deripa
detaa
dewa -or- wide LIG NM1 de/#a = goddess? 55
dide/didi
dideru OM PGS = einkorn wheat Cf. Linear B didero
didikase/didikaze
dii = 120

5
dija/dije NM1 Di/ #a Cf. Linear B Diwija Di#i/a = priestess of Zeus
dika
Dikate PGS TOP = Mount Dikte Cf. Linear B Dikatade Diktai/ade = towards Mt. Dikte
dikime
dikise
dima
dimaru
dimedu
dinaro
dinau = 130
dipa3a (dipaia) PGS di/paia <- di/paj de/paj = from a cup
dipaja PGS di/paia <- di/paj de/paj = from a cup (alternate?)
diqe -or- qedi LIG
diqise
dirasa
diredina
dirina
diru
disa
disipita = 140
ditajaru
ditamana PGS = dittany 60
du/dua/duja
dudama OM = a kind of fruit = dates? (found in context with figs)
dumaina
dumedi
dumitatira2 (dumitatirai) OM = left or right side of a spindle? (or verso) (agglutinative)
dunawi
dupa3na
Dupu3re TOP Cf. Linear B Dupu2razo Dupurai/zoj = 150
dura2 NM1 dou/lai = slaves (fem.) Cf. Linear B doera doe/la
durare OM = a type of grain, durum wheat? 65
Duratiqe
dureza/durezase OM = unit of dry measurement? (variation of: adureza?)
dusi/dusini
dusima
dusu
duti
duwi
duzu = 160

edamisa
edu
eka NM1 e3gxa (arch. acc.) spear, lance <- e3gxoj = spear Cf. Linear B eko
epa3
ero NM1 e0llo/j = young deer, fawn
esija MOSA NM1 e3sti/a = hearth of a house

6
etanasu
etori NM1 e1tori <- e1toj = for a year 70
ezusiqe

ia i0a/ NM1 (n. pl.) = an arrow (sing.) & i1a (n. pl.) = violets/ija NM? See i0a/ (n. pl.) = an arrow
(sing.) & i1a (n. pl.) = violets (variation). According to Daniel Rocha, arrows, fish and vases are
very common symbols in Linear A. = 170
Ida/Idaa/Idada/Idapa3 = Mount Ida PGS TOP
Idamate/Idamete PGS ONO 0Idama/te = Mother goddess of Mount Ida
Idarea ONO PGS 0Idar9ea = Rhea, goddess of Mount Ida
Idunesi TOP 75
iduti
ija See ia – above
ijadi
Ijapame TOP
ijate i0a/ter = doctor, physician Cf. Linear iyate i0a/ter
ika = 180
Ikesedesute TOP (agglutinative)
Ikurina ONO TOP
ikuta
ima i9ma/c = leather strap, thong; lash of a whip 80
imeti
inaimadu
Inajapaqa ONO
ipinama/ipinamina MOS NM1 i0pneume/na (fem. sing.) = baked (bread)
ira2 NM1 i1la=i = troops, companies, squadrons
iruja NM1 i0e/ruia = priestess Cf. Linear B iyereya i0e/reia = 190
isari
ise
itaja OM = unit of liquid volume for olive oil? (exact value unknown) 85
itaki
itijukui
Itinisa PGS ONO? female resident of Itanos?
itisapuko MOSE OMNM1 i1tija = round + pu/coj = box-wood -or- NMOM = i1tija =NM1
round (NM) + puko OM = tripod = round tripod Cf. puko below (agglutinative)
Ititikuna TOP
Izurinita TOP = 200 90

jaa
jadi/jadikitu
jadireja (agglutinative)
jadu
jadurati
jai
jainwaza (agglutinative)
jaiterikisu (agglutinative)
jaitose = 210

7
jaja
jakisikinu (agglutinative)
jako/jaku/jakute
jamaa
jamauti NM1 i1amauti = as a means of healing <- i1ama i1amatoj = healing, remedy
jami/jamidare
januti
japa/japadi/japaku
Japametu TOP(agglutinative)
Japanidami TOP (agglutinative) = 220
japarajase (agglutinative)
jara2qe
jara/jare/jaremi
jarepu2
jarete
jari/jarina/jarinu
jaripa3ku (agglutinative)
jarisapa (agglutinative) OM PGS = some kind of dress? Cf. Linear B sapa
jaru -or- ruja LIG = 230
jarui
jasaja NM1 0Ia=sai/a <- 0Ia=sw/ of/from the goddess of healing and health
jasamu
jasapai NM1OM related to related to - jasaja – above?
jasaraanane (agglutinative) NM1OM related to - jasaja – above?
jasasarame (agglutinative) NM1OM related to - jasaja – above?
jasidara NM1 i0a=sida=la/ = healing torch/firebrand (arch. acc.) 95
jasea/jasepa
jasie
jasumatu (agglutinative) = 240
jata/jatai/jatapi
jate/jateo NM1 i0a=th/r = physician
jatimane NM1 i0a=th/j mannei= = with the bread of healing (agglutinative)
jatituku+ jatituku (repeated) (agglutinative)
jatoja
jawi
jedi OM = man/men? Cf. Linear B atoroqo a0nqrw/pw
jeka
jemanata (agglutinative)
jetana = 250
jua
judu
juerupi
juka
juma/jumaku
juraa
jureku
juresa

8
jutiqa
juu = 260

kada/kadasaa
kadi MOSE NM1 kadi/ (instr. sing.) <- ka/doj = with a jar or vessel for water or wine
kadumane (agglutinative)
kadusi NM1 ka/dusi <= ka/doj = with buckets or pails (instr. pl.) 100
kae
kai/kaika
kairo NM1 kairo/j = due measure
kaji/kaju
kaki/kaku NM1 xalku/ <- xalko/j = copper, bronze
kakunete OMNM1 = bronze alloy - or – crafted in bronze (agglutinative) = 270
kami NM1 ka/mi (dat./instr. sing.) <- ka/ma = (on a) unit of land Cf. Linear B ka/ma
kana/kanatiti/kanau PGS TOP Kanna 105
kanaka PGS kna/ka (arch. acc. of respect) = saffron Cf Linear B kanako kna/koj
Kanijami ONO Kaniamis (female name)?
kanita
kanuti
kapa/kapaqe/kapate/kapi NM1 karpa/ (arch. acc.) + karpa/te\ = fruit, and fruit, with fruit -or-
ripe crops Cf. Linear B kapo karpo/j
kaporu
kapusi
kaqa/kaqe = 280
kara NM1 kara/ = head Cf. Linear B kara(pi) kara/afi 110
karona
karopa2 (karopai) OM = kylix with 2 handles-or- MOSE NM1 ka/rdoph = wooden vessel/vase
karu
karunau
kasaru OM = surviving? (drought)
kasi
Kasidizuitanai TOP
Kasikidaa ONO/TOP?
kasitero OMNM kasite/loj = boundary of...? (agglutinative) = 290 115
katanite (agglutinative)
kataro NM1 ka/nqa=roj = scarab (Egyptian) + drinking cup
kati NM1 ka/rtij = a kind of pot, hydria (water flask) Cf. Linear B kati hydria (water flask)
kaudeta OM = (having been) distributed? Cf. Linear B epididato e0pidi/tastoi
keda PGS = cedar
keire
Kekiru PGS TOP Ke/kru = Kekros
kera/kero NM1 ke/raj = horn (ivory) -or- khr/oj = bees-wax Cf. Linear B kera 120
keta/kete NM1 ga/da ga/de <- gado/j <- i0xqu/j = fish, here = fish-goddess. According to
Daniel Rocha, arrows, fish and vases are very common symbols in Linear A.
Ketesunata ONO/TOP = 300
kezadidi (agglutinative)
kida/kidi

9
kidapa OM = ash wood? (a type of wood) Appears only on Linear B tablet KN 894 N v 01
kidaro MOSC NM1 kidaro ke/dron = juniper berry-or- kedri/a = oil of cedar Cf. Linear B kidaro
kidata OM = to be accepted or delivered? (of crops) Cf. Linear B dekesato de/catoj 125
kidini
kidiora
kii/kiipa
kija
kika = 310
kikadi PGS = cicada (cricket)
kikina OM = some kind of fruit, quite likely grapes (from context)
kikiraja
kimu
kina PGS TOP Kinna
kinima
kinite
kipaa
kipisi NM1 ci/fisi <- ci/foj = with swords (instr. pl.)
kiqa = 320
kira
kireta2 (kiretai) NM1 kri/qai = barley 130
kiretana NM1 kriqani/aj = like barley, barley (attributive)
kireza OM = measurement of figs = 1 basket of figs carried on a shoulder
kiro/kirisi/kiru OM NM1? = owed Cf. Linear B oporo = they owed
kirusata -or- rusataki -or- satakiru etc. etc. + ideogram for “triangle” LIG
Kiso PGS TOP Kissos
kisusetu (agglutinative)
kitai/kitei NM1 = kestai/ kestei/ = embroidered (lit.), but in context = basketry, basket(s)
kitanasija/kitanasijase NM1 kitanisija (gen. sing.) ki/rtanasia <- ki/rtanoj = terebinth tree Cf.
Linear B kitano ki/rtanoj = 330 135
kitina NM1 ktoi/na/ktoina/siaj = border of a plot of land/territory Cf. Linear B kotona
kotoina ktoi/na = plot of land
kitiqa
kito NM1 xitw/n = chiton Cf. Linear B kito
koiru NM1 koi/ru <- koi/roj = hollow (ships)
koja
kopu
koru NM1 ko/ruj = helmet Cf. Linear B koru
Kosaiti TOP Cf. Linear B Kutaito Ku/taistoj (not necessarily the same place) 140
kuda = 340
kuja
kujude
kuka
Kukudara TOP Cf. Linear B Kukudaro
kumaju
kumapu
kunisu OM = emmer wheat (derivation: Semitic kunnisu)
kupa/kupi

10
kupa3natu (agglutinative)
kupa3nu = 350
kupa3pa3
kupa3rija (agglutinative)
kupaja
kupari NM1 ku/pairi (instr. sing.) <- ku/pairoj = marsh-plant used to feed horses, galingale or
ginger
Kupatikidadia ONO TOP (agglutinative)
kupazu NM1 kou/fazu <- kou/fazoj = light (of wine) 145
kuqani OM = a type of (fine) wine
kura/kuramu
kurasaqa (agglutinative)
kuratujo= 360
kureda
kureju
kuro/kurotu NM1 ku=roj = supreme power, authority & ku=rwn = reaching, attaining i.e. = total
Cf. Linear B tosa to/sa
kuto/kutu NM1 ku/toj = shield, cuirass
kuruku PGS kro/koj = crocus, saffron 150
kuruma
Kutiti TOP (locative sing.) Kutaistos Cf. LB Kutaito
kutu NM1 ku/tu <- ku/toj = vase, jar, pot, urn
kutukore (agglutinative)
kuwa -or- waku LIG NM1 ku/#a = girl Cf. Linear B kowa ko/#a – or – #a0sku/ <- #a0sko/j =
leather bag or wineskin = 370
kuzuni OM = einkorn wheat

maa
madadu
madi OM = a ram? (probably, because it appears to be masculine and is used in conjunction
with the ideogram for “sheep”.
mai/maimi
majutu
makaise
makaita
makarite MOSC NM1 makari/thj = one who is blessed -or- magarei=te\ = and with a cooking
pot (instr. Sing.) <- mageirei=on = cooking pot 155
makidete (agglutinative) = 380
mana/manapi (common) PGS Hebrew manna= = (of spiritual food) bread from heaven, the
supernatural food eaten by the Israelites in the desert
maniki
manirizu (agglutinative)
manuqa
maru/maruku/maruri NM1 mallo/j = flock of wool Cf. Linear B mali mali/ = wool
masa/masaja
masi/masidu
Masuja ONO?

11
masuri
matapu = 390
mateti *
matiti *
matizaite (agglutinative) * Are these words with an asterisk all related to mate (mother)?
matu
maza/mazu NM1 ma=za = kneaded or unbaked bread, barley bread/cake
medakidi (agglutinative)
Mekidi ONO Megi/di <- Me/gaj = the Great 160
mesiki -or- sikime -or- kimesi etc. LIG
mepajai
mera NM1 mela/j = black - or – me/la (arch. accus.) = honey = 400
merasasaa/merasasaja (very common) = something to do with honey/ honeycomb or honey
drink? (agglutinative)
mesasa
Mesenurutu TOP (agglutinative)
meto NM1 mesto/j = full, filled
meturaa
meza NM1 me/za (fem. sing.) = greater, bigger Cf. Linear B mezo me/zwn me/zoj 165
mia
midai
midani
midamara2 (midamarai) (agglutinative) = 410
midara
Midemidiu TOP (agglutinative)
mie
miima
mijanika (agglutinative)
mijuke
mikidua (agglutinative)
mikisena (agglutinative)
minaminapii (agglutinative)
minedu = 420
mini/miniduwa
minumi
minute (sing. minuta2 – minutai) OM = pulse crop, any one of broad beans (faba/fava), chick
peas, lentils or vetch (permuted) See Appendix 2 below – or – Mi/nute\ <- Mi/noste\ = and Minos
mio/miowa
mipa
mireja NM1 mhle/a = apple tree -or- mh/leia (gen. sing.) = belonging to a sheep
miru NM1 mh=lon = a sheep or goat -or- mh1lon = apple, tree fruit
mirutarare OMNM1? = sheep pen? -or- apple orchard? (agglutinative) 170
misimiri (agglutinative)
misuma = 430
mita NM1 mi/nqa = mint Cf. Linear B mita
miturea NM1 mi/toj 9Re/a= thread of a warp for Rhea (agglutinative)
mizase

12
mujatewi (agglutinative)
muko NM1 mu=xo/j = innermost place, inmost nook, corner, recess
mupi
murito
muru NM1 mu/ron = sweet oil extracted from plants; sweet oil; unguent; perfume Cf. Linear B
musaja

naa = 440
nadare
nadi/nadiradi/nadiredi
nadiwi
nadu
nadunapu2a (agglutinative)
Naisizamikao TOP (agglutinative) 175
naka NM1 na/ka (arch. acc) <- na/koj = sheep’s fleece
nakiki
Nakininuta ONO (agglutinative)
nakuda = 450
Namarasasaja TOP (agglutinative)
namatiti (agglutinative)
nami
namikua/namikuda
namine
nanau
nanipa3
napa3du
narepirea OMNM1 narepir9e/a = Rhea, goddess of the snake/ snake goddess? (agglutinative)
naridi = 460
narinarikui (agglutinative)
narita
naroka
naru
nasarea OMNM = Rhea, goddess of ... ? (agglutinative) 180
nasekimi (agglutinative)
nasi
nasisea OMNM1 nasise/a = goddess of ... ? (agglutinative)
nataa/nataje
Natanidua ONO (agglutinative) = 470
natareki (common)
nati
nazuku/nazuru
nea NM1 ne/a = new Cf. Linear B ne/#a = new
neakoa
nedia
nedira
neka/nekisi
nemaduka (agglutinative)

13
nemaruja = 480
nemiduda (agglutinative)
nemusaa (agglutinative)
Nenaarasaja TOP
neqa
neramaa
nerapa/nerapaa
nere OM = larger amphora size (fem. plural) 185
nesa/nesaki/nesakimi
nesasawi (agglutinative)
nesekuda (agglutinative) = 490
neta
netapa
netuqe
nidapa
nidiki/nidiwa
niduti
nijanu
niku/nikutitii (agglutinative)
nimi
nipa3 = 500
nira2 (nirai) -or- nita2 (nitai) OM = figs + ideogram = NI (in both Linear A & B)
niro/niru
nisi
nisudu
nisupu
niti
nizuka
nizuuka
nua
nude = 510
nuki/nukisikija (agglutinative)
numida/numideqe
nupa3ku (extremely common)
nupi
nuqetu
nuti/nutini
Nutiuteranata TOP (agglutinative)
nutu
nuwi

odami/odamia NM1 ou0dami/a = no one (fem.) = 520

opi
oraidine (agglutinative)
osuqare (agglutinative)
otanize
oteja NM1 o1steia <- o1streia = oyster pigment; oyster purple Cf. Linear B otawero o1streioj

14
pa (common)/paa
padaru
padasuti
pade
padupaa = 530
Paito PGS TOP = Phaistos Cf. Linear B Paito Faisto/j
pa3a/pa3ana
pa3da
pa3dipo
pa3katari NM1 pagkra/dh = all-powerful, almighty, all-ruling 190
pa3kija
pa3ku
pa3ni/pa3nina/pa3niwi OM = millet -or- spelt
pa3pa3ku
pa3qa = 540
pa3qe -or- qepa3 i.e. paiqe -or- qepai (+ ideogram for “wheat”) LIG = a kind of grain similar
to wheat
pa3roka
pa3sase
pa3waja OMNM1 pai#ai/a = something to do with land (agglutinative)
paja/pajai/pajare OM = contracted, indentured, hired?
paka (very common)/paku (very common)/pakuka
Pamanuita ONO (agglutinative) 195
para NM1 para\ = beside, from beside, by the side of, beyond etc.
parane = 550
paria
paroda
parosu
pasarija = NM1 pa=sa + OM rija = all-encompassing, international? (agglutinative)
pase
pasu
pata/patada/pataqe/patu OM = small handle-less cups Cf. Linear B dipa anowe, dipa
anowoto
patane OM = lentils? (fem. pl.)
pia/pii
pija/pijani/pijawa = 560
piku/pikui/pikuzu
pimata PGS = pimento 200
pimitatira2 (pimitatirai) = right of left side of a spindle? -or- verso (agglutinative)
pina/pini
pirueju
pisa
pita/pitaja OM - or- MOSE NM1 pista/kion = pistachio-nut
pitakase/pitakesi MOSE NM1 pista/kesi = with pistachio-nuts (instr. pl.)
pitara
piteri = 570

15
piwaa
piwaja
piwi
posa NM1 po/sa= (arch. acc.) <- poi/si=j = drink(ing), beverage -or- po/sa <- po/soj = how great,
how much, of what value?
posi -or- sipo LIG NM1 posi/ = on, upon Cf. Linear B posi -or- sipo = si/fwn = reed, straw,
siphon 205
potokuro NM1 poto/n + ku/rwn = reaching a full drink, a full draught (agglutinative)
pu2juzu
pu2su/pu2sutu
pu3pi
pu3tama = 580
puko OM = tripod Cf. Linear B pukoso pu/coj = box-wood. Apparently unrelated

punikaso PGS NM1 funi/kasoj = crimson, red (of wine) Cf. Linear B ponikiya ponikiyo
foini/kioj = crimson
puqe
pura2 (purai) OM = pulse crop, any one of broad beans (faba/fava), chick peas, lentils or vetch
(permuted) See Appendix 2 below 210
pusa/pusi
pusuqe

Qara2wa ONO/TOP Cf. Linear B Qara2wo

Qa2ra2wa ONO/TOP? (variation)
qajo NM1 ba/i"on = a palm branch (Kafkania pebble) = 590
qaka
qanuma OM = pulse crop, any one of broad beans (faba/fava), chick peas, lentils or vetch
(permuted) See Appendix 2 below
qapa3 (qapai) OM = (large) handle-less vase or amphora 215
qapaja/qapajanai OM qapaja (genitive sing. of qapa3 (qapai))
qaqada
qaqaru OM = a livestock animal, probably a cow or bull or ox
qareto OM = lease field? Cf. Linear B onato
qaqisenuti NM1 xalkei/a=senuti = with bronze craftsmanship (agglutinative)
qaro NM1 ba=lo/j = threshold 220
qasaraku = 600
qatidate OM = (plot of) olive trees, lit. trees+olives (fem. pl., agglutinative) See datu above...
qati/qatiki OM = tree?
qatiju
qedi OM = a flagon (for wine)

16
qedeminu
qeja
qeka
qenamiku (agglutinative)
qenupa
qepaka = 610
qepita
qepu
qequre
qera2u/qera2wa OM = a type of grain, probably millet or spelt (inflected)
qeria OM = probably millet or spelt 225
qero NM1 be/loj = arrow, dart
qerosa
qesite
qesizue OM (plural) = wine goblets?
qesupu = 620
qesusui
qeta2e
qeti (instr. sing.)/qetiradu OM/PGS = a very large pot, pithos Cf. Linear B PGS qeto pi/qoj
qetune
qisi
qoroqa NM1 ko/lon kai\ = and broken (of a spear) (see Kafkania Pebble)
quqani OM = medium size vase or amphora 230

raa
rada/radaa/radakuku/radami
radarua = 630
radasija
radizu
radu NM1 r9a/bdu <- r9a/bdoj = rod, switch; spear-staff or shaft
ra2i
ra2ka
Ra2madami TOP OMNM1 (locative sing.?), i.e. at Raimadamos = the town of Raima
ra2miki
ra2natipiwa (agglutinative)
ra2pu/ra2pu2
ra2ri (rairi) PGS OM = lily = 640
ra2rore *
ra2ru *
ra2saa * variants of - ra2ri (rairi) – above?
ra2ti (raiti) NM1 r9aisth/r = a hammer, crusher
Raja/Raju PGS ONO TOP 9Rai/a = Raia Cf. Linear B Raja 235
raka/rakaa NM1 r9axa/ <- r9axo/j = thorn bush (arch. acc.)
raki/rakii/rakisi/raku
ranatusu (agglutinative?) -or- NM1 r9anatusu < - r9anti/zw = to cleanse, purify
rani NM1 r9a=ni/j = anything sprinkled (as in a libation); rain drop See also ratise
raodiki = 650

17
rapa/rapu
rapu3ra
raqeda
rarasa
rarua
rasa/rasi
rasamii
rasasaa/rasasaja
rata/ratapi
ratada = 660
ratise (ritise?) NM1 = la/tise <- la/taj = with drops of wine (instr. pl.)
razua
rea PGS r9e/a = goddess, Rhea
reda (common)/redana/redasi
Redamija ONO 240
redise
reduja
reja/rejapa
rekau
rekotuku (agglutinative) = 670
reku/rekuqa/rekuqe
rema/rematuwa
remi
renara/renaraa
renute
repa
Repu2dudatapa TOP (agglutinative)
repu3du
reqasuo
reradu = 680
Rera2tusi TOP (locative sing.?) (agglutinative)
Reratarumi TOP (locative sing.?) (agglutinative)
rerora2
rese/resi/resu See sere
retaa/retada
retaka
retata2
retema
reza OM = standard unit of linear measurement
rezakeiteta OM = something to do with measurement (agglutinative) 690
ria (common)
ridu
rikata
rima NM1 lei=mac = garden -or- lei=mma = remnant, remains -or- lh=mma = income, receipts
(dative/instrumental plural) 245
rimisi See above (instr. pl.)
ripaku

18
ripatu
riqesa
rira/riruma
rirumati (agglutinative) = 700
risa
Risaipa3dai TOP (agglutinative)
Risumasuri TOP (locative sing.?) (agglutinative)
ritaje
rite/ritepi
ritoe
rodaa/rodaki
roika NM1 9roika/ (fem. sing.) = crooked Cf. Linear B roiko r
9 oiko/j
roke/roki/roku
romaku = 710
romasa
ronadi
rore/roreka
rorota -or- taroro LIG
rosa PGS = rose
rosirasiro OMPGS = rosebush? (agglutinative) 250
rotau
roti
rotwei
rua = 720
rudedi
ruiko
Rujamime TOP (agglutinative)
ruka/rukaa/ruki/rukike
Rukito PGS TOP Cf. Linear B Rukito Lu/kinqoj
ruko
rukue
ruma/rumu/rumata/rumatase lu=matase <- lu=ma = offscourings from grain, i.e chaff
rupoka
ruqa/ruqaqa (common) = 730
rusa (common/rusaka
rusi
rutari
rutia
ruzuna

sadi
saja/sajama/sajamana
sajea
saka NM1 sa/kka (arch. acc.) <- sa/kkoj = coarse cloth of hair from goats; sackcloth -or- sa/ka
<- sa/koj a shield made of wicker
sama/samaro PGS or NM1 sama/ro = burial ground Cf. Linear B Sama/ra sama/ra = place
name -or- monument -or- grave mound OR sa/meron = today= 740 255

19
samidae
samuku
sanitii
sapo/sapi
saqa
saqeri
sara2 (sarai)/sarara/saru OM = flax
sareju
saro/saru/sarutu NM1 sa/ron = broom, threshing floor -or- flax (inflected)
sasaja = 750
sasame PGS sasa/me = sesame Cf. Linear B sasa/ma
sasupu
sato PGS Hebrew sa/ton = Hebrew unit of measurement.
sea/sei NM1 se/a se/ei (dat. sing.) = snake goddess (from K. Bouzanis) 260
sedina PGS = celery Cf. Linear B serino se/linon
sedire
seikama NM1 = seika/ma = a unit of land dedicated to a/the goddess
Seimasusaa TOP (agglutinative)
seitau
Sejarapaja ONO/TOP (agglutinative) = 760
Sejasinataki TOP (agglutinative) 265
sekadidi (agglutinative)
sekatapi (agglutinative)
sekidi
Sekiriteseja ONO (agglutinative)
sekutu
semake
semetu PGS ONO= Semitic?
senu
sepa = 770
sere -or- rese LIG NM1 seirei/ <- seira/ = with a cord or rope (instrumental sing.)
sesapa3
Sesasinunaa ONO (agglutinative)
sesi -or- sise LIG 270
setamaru OMNM (agglutinative) = something to do with wool/spun wool?
Seterimuajaku ONO (agglutinative)
setira
Setoija PGS TOP Cf. Linear B Setoiya Shtoi/a
Sewaude TOP
sezami = 780
Sezanitao TOP (agglutinative) 275
sezaredu (agglutinative)
Sezatimitu TOP (agglutinative)
sia
side/sidi/sidija/sidare/sidate/sidatoi NM1 si/dh si/dia = pomegranate tree
sii/siida/siisi
siitau

20
sija
Sijanakarunau TOP (agglutinative)
sika NM1 shka/ (arch. acc.) <- shko/j = fold, enclosure; (sheep) pen; sacred precinct, shrine =
<- zhka/zw = to pen in Cf. Linear B periqoro peri/boloj = sheep pen 790
siketapi
Sikine PGS TOP loc. sing. of Sikinos -or- OM = a type of grain
Sikira/Sikirita PGS ONO/TOP -or- NM1 si/kera = sweet fermented liquor LB sikiro 280
Sima PGS TOP Si/ma = Sima Cf. Linear B Sima -or- sh=ma = sign, mark, token; omen; mound;
grave, tomb Cf. sama/samaro above
simara
simita PGS = mouse (arch. acc.) simito/simitu PGS = zmi/nqoj mouse
sina
sinada
sinae
sinakanau (common) (agglutinative) = 800
sinakase (agglutinative)
sinamiu (agglutinative)
sinatakira (agglutinative)
sinedui
sipiki
sipu3ka
sire/siro/siru/sirute
siriki
Sirumarita2 TOP? (agglutinative)
sita2 (sitai) -or- ta2si (taisi) LIG = 810
sitetu NM1 See situ below
situ NM1 si/tu si/tun = wheat Cf. Linear B sito si/ton 285
siwamaa (agglutinative)
sokanipu (agglutinative)
sokemase (agglutinative)
sudaja
suja
Sukirita/Sukiriteija TOP = Sybrita Cf. Linear B Sukirita Su/grita
suniku (common) NM1 su/noiku <- su/noikoj living together, joint inhabitant, dweller
supa3 (supai)/supa3ra (supaira) OM =small cup with handles Cf. Linear B dipa mewiyo
supi/supu/supu2 OM = largest size pithos -or- MOSE NM1 supu/h sipu/h sipu/a i0pu/a = meal
tub = 820
sure
Suria PGS TOP 290
suropa OM = some kind of vase?
sutu/sutunara
suu
suzu NM1 su/zuc = yoked together; paired Cf. Linear B zeukesi zeu/gesi = yoked (instr. pl.)

taa
tadaki/tadati
tadeuka

21
taikama OM tai + NM1 ka/ma = a unit of land, something like an acre? = 830
Tainaro TOP Tai/na=ron Taenaros promontory and town
tainumapa (agglutinative)
Ta2merakodisi TOP (locative sing.?) (agglutinative)
ta2re/ta2reki NM1 sta=rei<- stai=j wheaten flour mixed into dough + tasise sta/sisei
ta2riki 295
Ta2rimarusi TOP (locative sing.?) (agglutinative)
tai2si (taisi) NM1 stai=sei <- stai=j = with wheaten flour mixed into a dough (instr. pl.)
ta2tare
ta2tite
ta2u = 840
tajusu
takaa/takari
taki/taku/takui NM1 ta=xei/ <- ta=xu/j = quick, swift, speedy
Tamaduda ONO? (agglutinative)
Tanamaje TOP (agglutinative) 300
tanate/tanati
Tanunikina TOP (agglutinative)
tamaru
tami/tamia/tamisi
tani/taniria/tanirizu = 850
taniti
tapa NM1 ta/rfa = thick, close Cf. Linear B tapa
tapiida
tapiqe
tara
tarasa PGS = sea Cf. Linear B tarasa qa/lassa
tarawita PGS = terebinth tree Cf. Linear B kitano ki/rtanoj & timito ti/rminqoj
tarejanai (agglutinative)
tarikisu (agglutinative)
tarina M1 qalli/na (arch. acc.) <- qallo/j = a young shoot, twig; festive olive-branch = 860
305
taritama (agglutinative)
taro MOSE NM1 tau=roj = bull
tasa/tasaja
tasise
tata/tati
tateikezare (agglutinative)
tedasi/tedatiqa
tedekima (agglutinative)
teepikia (agglutinative)
Teizatima ONO (agglutinative) = 870
tejai qei/ai = goddesses
Tejare TOP Cf. Linear B Tejaro qei/aroj = place of the gods?
tekare
teke/teki OM = small unit of measurement for wine @ 27 1/2 units per tereza 310
tekidia

22
temada/temadai
temeku
temirerawi (agglutinative)
tenamipi (agglutinative)
tenata/tenataa = 880
Tenatunapa3ku TOP (agglutinative)
tenekuka (agglutinative)
teneruda (agglutinative)
teniku
tenitaki (agglutinative)
tenu/tenumi (common)
tepi
tera/tere/teri
teraseda (agglutinative)
tereau = 890
tereza OM = liquid unit of measurement
teri/teridu
terikama NM1 te/leika/ma = extent of land, i.e. something like acreage, lit. land to its extent or
boundary (agglutinative)
tero/teroa NM1 te/loj = end, boundary
terota -or- rotate -or- tatero etc. LIG – variation of the above?
terusi (extremely common)
tesi/tesiqe (and a) small unit of measurement 315
Tesudesekei TOP (agglutinative)
tetita2
tetu NM1 th=tou <- th=tej = of this year (gen. sing.) Cf. Linear B weto #e/toj = this year = 900
Tewirumati TOP (locative sing.?)
Tidama ONO?
tidata
tidiate
tiditeqati (agglutinative)
tiduitii/tiisako (agglutinative)
tija
tika
tikiqa
tikuja = 910
Tikuneda ONO (agglutinative)
timaruri/timaruwite (agglutinative)
timasa
timi
Timunuta ONO (agglutinative) 320
tina
Tinakarunau TOP (agglutinative)
tinata (common)/tinita
tinesekuda (agglutinative)
tininaka = 920
tinu/tinuka

23
tinusekiqa (agglutinative)
tio
tiqatediti (agglutinative)
tiqe/tiqeri/tiqeu
tiraduja
tira2
tirakapa3 (agglutinative)
tire
tisa OM = pottery worker/working on pottery/pottery wheel (tourney)? = 930
tisiritua (agglutinative)
tisudapa (agglutinative)
Tita PGS/ONO =Titan Ti=ta/n
titema
titiku
titima
Titisutisa ONO (agglutinative)
tiu
tiumaja
tizanukaa (agglutinative) = 940
toipa
tome
toraka PGS qw/rac = breastplate, cuirass = Linear B toraka 325
toreqa
toro NM1 tau/roj = bull -or- qolo/j = dome or circular vault; vaulted building. See
bibliography 77, Smithsonian
totane
tuda
tujuma
tukidija (agglutinative)
tukuse = 950
tuma/tumei/tumi MOSD NM1 qumi/a = incense
Tumitizase TOP -or- OM = linen Cf. Linear B rino li/non
tunada/tunapa
tunapa3ku (agglutinative)
Tunija TOP
tunu
turunu PGS NM1 qo/rnoj = throne Cf. Linear B tono qo/rnoj 330
tupadida
tuqe
turaa = 960
turunuseme NM1OM = throne room (agglutinative)
turusa
tusi/tusu/tusupu2
tute/tutesi

udami/udamia NM1? = variation of oudamia?

udimi

24
udiriki NM1 u3driki <- u3droj = with water
uju
ukare OM = sowing or harvesting
uki = 970
Uminase OM TOP Cf. Linear B Aminiso = harbour
unaa NM1 oi0nai/a = wine vessel, wine jug, wine jar 335
unadi (common)
unakanasi OM = for/with illnesses? (instr. pl.)
unana OM = penny royal?
Unarukanasi/Unarukanati ONO/TOP (locative sing.?) (agglutinative)
upa
uqeti
urewi
uro NM1 ou0=loj = entire, total. Cf. kuro ku=rwn = reaching, attaining i.e. = total = 980
uso/usu
uta/uta2
utaise
utaro
uti

waduko
Waduna ONO/TOP Cf. LB Waduna
Wadunimi TOP = the place or town of Waduna? (locative sing.?) 340
waja NM1 #ai/a = earth, land
wanai = 990
wanaka PGS = king
wapusua
wara2qa
wasato NM1 #a/stu a1stu = town Cf. Lnear B wato #a/stu
Wasatomaro NM1 + OM TOP = the name of a town (agglutinative)
watepidu (agglutinative)
watumare (agglutinative)
wazudu
wetujupitu (agglutinative)
widina = 1000
widui
wija
Wijasumatiti TOP (locative sing.?) = at Wijasumatitos (agglutinative) 345
winadu #i1nadu = vineyard Cf. Linear B winado
winipa
winu NM1 #i/nu = wine Cf. Linear B wono #oi/noj
winumatari NM1 #i/numa/tari = wine dedicated to Mother Earth (agglutinative)
Wiraremite TOP (agglutinative)
wireu NM1 #i0eru/ <- #i0ero/j = priest Cf. Linear B iyero i0ero/j
wirudu = 1010 350
Wisasane TOP
witero

25
Zadeu/Zadeujuraa ONO (masc./fem.)
zadua
zakisenui
zama/zame
zanwaija
zapa
zare/zaredu/zareki/zaresea
zasata = 1020
zirinima
zokupa
zokutu
zudu/zudi OM = peak - as in peak sanctuaries... [9]

zukupi
zuma NM1 zw=ma girdle, belt; girded tunic 351
zupaku
zusiza
zusu
zute = 1030

TOTAL = 1030 + Total deciphered or tentatively deciphered = 351/1030 = 34 % maximum

Younger = 774
Difference = 256
Younger % of this Lexicon = 75 %
This lexicon > Younger by 25 %

VERSUS Younger = 774 ( – numeric syllabograms + long strings + broken series of

syllabograms). Hence Younger’s lexicon amounts to 75 % of this one, i.e. this lexicon contains

26
256 more entries and is 25 % longer. Margin of error = 30 % +/- 4 % = 26 % minimum

What does the decipherment of Linear A entail?

To begin with, right off the top, there is actually no such thing as the decipherment of Linear
A. In light of the various methodologies invoked for the decipherment of Linear A terminology
at various levels, such a definition is out of the question.

Definitions and Commentary for all the KEY terminology for this Lexicon:

1. New Minoan:

The codes NM1/NM2 refer to Mycenaean-derived New Minoan vocabulary. But what is New
Minoan? I have coined this neologism to refer to any and all words found in the Linear A
syllabary which appear either to be proto-Greek or derived from Mycenaean Greek, the latter
alternative being the more plausible. The question is, how could Mycenaean-derived or actual
Mycenaean Greek words have found their way into Minoan, an entirely different language,
which as far as we know has not yet been deemed to fall in the ancient (proto-) Indo-
European family of languages, let alone in any other known ancient class of languages? For all
we know, Minoan may be a language isolate, like modern Basque. No linguistic evidence has
yet come to the fore to substantiate the origin of the Minoan language. But here we are
focusing our present inquiry into the perceived or actual influx of a Mycenaean-derived
superstratum on the Minoan language substratum.

What is a linguistic superstratum?

In Prehistory: the Making of the Human Mind, Colin Renfrew has this to say,

The linguistic map must have been complicated, however, by such processes as elite
dominance, where a small group of incomers seize power in an already well-established
society, and gradually impose their language upon it. Since the incoming group would
be very small in such a case, the molecular genetic effects might be difficult to detect.
The linguistic map is complicated further by processes of convergence, where the
languages spoken by the two groups in close contact begin to share common features.
(all italics mine) [2]

This linguistic premise closely mirrors my own, which I arrived at independently and without
foreknowledge of Renfrew’s book I read about a year after I drew my own conclusions
uncannily echoing his own:

If the Norman conquest of England resulted in a massive overhaul of English vocabulary,

might we not imagine a similar phenomenon metamorphosing the Minoan language?
This hypothesis allows us some latitude in conjecturing a similar scenario for the
incursion of Mycenaean vocabulary into Linear A. The influx of any many as 230
Mycenaean words or a maximum of 22.4 % out of a total of some 1030 intact words in
Linear A was due to the conquest of Knossos and Minoan Crete by the Mycenaeans in
around 1500-1450 BCE or, failing that, by their outright suzerainty over the Minoan
civilization. This phenomenon is akin to the Norman French conquest of English in 1066

27
 AD, some 2600 years later. Conquest of a prior civilization entailing the assimilation of a
foreign source language’s vocabulary into the target language or origin is referred to as
Elite Dominance. Suzerainty without conquest is called Demography Subsistence. In
either case, the result is substantially the same.

In other words, the Mycenaean conquest of Knossos and Crete or, failing that, of their all but
absolute suzerainty over these territories ca. 1550-1450 BCE appears to have had an outcome
similar to the Norman invasion of England in 1066 CE, namely, that much of the vocabulary
of the source language of the invaders, the Mycenaeans, found its way into the target or
original language, Minoan. The implications of the influx of Mycenaean artistic and cultural
practices, and in particular of its script are far-reaching. According to the Smithsonian [3],

... scribes switched from Linear A to Linear B, using the alphabet to write not the
language of the Minoans, but Mycenaean Greek. It’s a crucial transition that
archaeologists are desperate to understand, says Brogan. “What brings about the
collapse of the Minoans, and at the same time what causes the emergence of the
Mycenaean palace civilization?” (italics mine)

But there is more to the phenomenon than merely switching back and forth from Linear A to
Linear B. As we shall shortly demonstrate, the scribes, in this case at Knossos, may
occasionally have inscribed Mycenaean Greek in the Linear A syllabary. If so, this practice
would have been confined to the latter days of Linear A, just prior to its replacement by Linear
B as the new “official” script of the palace administration both at Knossos and elsewhere, most
notably at Haghia Triada. If then Mycenaean Greek was from time to time inscribed in Linear
A, the original Mycenaean vocabulary would have had to be adjusted to meet the dictates of
standard Minoan orthography. This is the one aspect of the incursion of new vocabulary from
a source language (in this case, Mycenaean Greek) into a target language (here, Minoan) that
all historical linguists to date have entirely overlooked. And it is critical to the understanding
of how Mycenaean-derived words in Linear A are so often spelled differently ― though not
radically so (and this is the entire point) ― than their Mycenaean sources.

The Minoan orthography for almost all Mycenaean-derived vocabulary in this Lexicon must
inevitably and constitutionally conform to the orthographic, syntactic and morphological
dictates of the Minoan language. There are very few exceptions where the orthography of
Mycenaean-derived New Minoan words is either identical or practically so to the original
Mycenaean, for instance:
depa/depu PGS de/paj de/pu (acc.?)= cup Cf. Linear B dipa di/paj & Homeric de/pa
Idamate/Idamete PGS ONO 0Idama/te = Mother goddess of Mount Ida
kara NM1 kara/ = head Cf. Linear B kara(pi) kara/afi
kami NM1 ka/mi (dat./instr. sing.) <- ka/ma = (on a) unit of land Cf. Linear B ka/ma
meza NM1 me/za (fem. sing.) = greater, bigger Cf. Linear B mezo me/zwn me/zoj
Paito = Phaistos PGS TOP Cf Linear B Paito Faisto/j
Setoija PGS TOP Cf. Linear B Setoiya Shtoi/a

Allow me to illustrate this through comparison with the influx of some 10,000 French words
into English between ca. 1100 & 1450 CE. French vocabulary could not be assimilated into
English without undergoing a fundamental metamorphosis in orthography adjusting the

28
original French vocabulary to the dictates of English spelling (italics mine). Examples
running into the tens of thousands abound. So we should not be at all surprised at a similar
adjustment in the orthography from the Mycenaean-derived vocabulary to the substratum
Minoan vocabulary derived from the Mycenaean superstratum. After all, when superstratum
French words are imported into English, their orthography almost always undergoes the same
metamorphosis. Orthographic metamorphoses of French words into English proliferate. Just
skimming the surface, we find:

French to English: KEY: adj = change in adjective; co = consonant deletion or insertion; grfr =
Germanic + French; meta= metathesis; or = change in orthography; ph = phrase substituted;
pr = prefix change; pre = preposition added; su = suffix change; sy = extra synonym; vo =
vowel deletion or insertion

These are some of the most common templates for orthographic conversion from French to
English. Each template is tagged alphanumerically. There are considerably more than the 29
you see here, but in a cross-section this small it is of course impossible to account for them all.

1. albâtre = alabaster /or vo

2. amical = amicable /co su
3. bénin = benign /co su
4. ciprès (from Old French cipres) = cypress /co or su
5. cloître = cloister /co or su
6. dédain = disdain /pr
7. dédoublé = doubled up /co pre su
8. doute = doubt /co or
7. entrée = entrance /su
9. fanatique = fanatic /or su
10. gobelet = goblet /vo
11. intercaler = insérer = to insert /su sy
12. interlignes + dans les interlignes = between the lines /grfr ph
13. jalousie = jealousy /meta or
14. loutre = otter /co or
1. maître = master /co or
15. miction = micturition /su vo
16. parachutisme = parachuting /su
1. plâtras = lump of plaster /co grfr ph su
1. plâtre = plaster /co su
16. practicien = practitioner co su
17. rembarquement = re-embarcation /co vo su
18. renouvelable = renewable /meta or vo
19. retenir = retain /meta su
20. sans-parti = member of no party /grfr ph
21. soldat = soldier /su
22. source sûre = reliable source /adj
23. similitude = similarity /co or su
15. sous-estimation = underestimation /grfr pre
15. 24. sous-ingénieur = assistant engineer /meta adj pre

29
15. sous-exposition = underexposure /grfr meta pre su
25. surabondant = overabundant /grfr pre
26. suractivité = overactivity /grfr pre su
27. synérèse = synaeresis /meta or su
28. terminaison = termination /meta co su
1. trois-mâts = three master, three-masted ship /grfr or ph
29. urgence = emergency /meta su

and on and on ad nauseam. This phenomenon applies to every last target substratum
language upon which a source superstratum from another language is imposed. The point is
that specific orthographic conventions (templates) must be followed in the process of
orthographic conversion of the same or similar word from French to English. The same
fundamental principle applies to the orthographic conversion of the same or similar word
from Mycenaean-derived Greek words to their Minoan equivalents. So in the case of New
Minoan (NM1), it is inevitable that the orthography of any single superstratum Mycenaean
derived word has likewise to be adjusted to meet the exigencies of Minoan orthography (all
italics mine).

However, the impact and the implications of the superstrata not are so clear-cut as we might
imagine when we compare the incursion of French vocabulary into English (ca. 1100 – 1450
CE) and that of Mycenaean-derived Greek into the Minoan (ca. 1550 – 1400 BCE?), as
illustrated here:

I have found it necessary to draw a distinction in the layering of the superstrata as these apply
to the incursion of Mycenaean-derived vocabulary into Minoan versus the veritable flood of
French vocabulary into English. Because the time frame or, if you will, the timeline, for the
imposition of the Mycenaean superstratum in Linear A is so brief, no more than 150 years at
the most, compared with that for the French superstratum overlay onto English, running for a
least 350 years, I have to characterize the former as narrow and shallow, versus the latter as
deep and broad (italics mine). The implications are profound. Given the restricted timeline
for the Mycenaean-derived superstratum, it is to be expected that the total number of
Mycenaean-derived words is bound to be proportionally much lower than the totals for
French words flowing into English. In other words, for every 10 words imported into English,

30
we might expect only 2 or 3 into Minoan. But the results actually exceed our expectations.

Moreover, the vast French vocabulary eventually running to hundreds of thousands of words
imported into English is nothing short of the entire stock of imported vernacular and literary
French combined. This is in stark contrast to the transfer of Mycenaean-derived vocabulary
into the Minoan language, which comprises mostly inventories and to some extent religious
terminology, which is more predominant in Linear A than in Linear B. So to summarize, both
nature of the vocabulary imported from Mycenaean Greek into the Minoan language on the
one hand and its proportionality to the total Minoan lexicon is in fact narrow and shallow
compared with the much broader and deeper influx of French vocabulary into English. Yet,
even in spite of these constrictions, Mycenaean-derived New Minoan NM1 vocabulary
comprises at least 16 % of the entire Linear A lexicon, a remarkable outcome under the
circumstances, given that French vocabulary accounts for 29 % of English.

There are two levels of probability for Mycenaean-derived vocabulary in Linear A: the first is
NM1 for imported words for which contextual circumstantial evidence on the tablets and
fragments themselves approaches certainty or high probability for said New Minoan
vocabulary. Allow me to illustrate. At the NM1 level of certainty, we find:
1 depa/depu PGS de/paj de/pu (acc.?)= cup Cf. Linear B dipa di/paj & Homeric de/pa
2 kapa/kapaqe/kapi NM1 karpa/ (arch. acc.) + karpa/te\ = fruit, and fruit, with fruit -or- ripe
crops Cf. Linear B kapo karpo/j
3 kireta2 (kiretai) NM1 kri/qai = barley
4 kuro/kurotu NM1 ku=roj = supreme power, authority & ku=rwn = reaching, attaining i.e. =
total
5 maru/maruku/maruri NM1 mallo/j = flock of wool Cf. Linear B mali mali/ = wool
6 meza NM1 me/za (fem. sing.) = greater, bigger Cf. Linear B mezo me/zwn me/zoj
7 mita NM1 mi/nqa = mint Cf. Linear B mita
8 punikaso PGS NM1 funi/kasoj = crimson, red (of wine) Cf. Linear B ponikiya ponikiyo
foini/kioj = crimson
9 situ NM1 si/tu = wheat Cf. Linear B sito si/ton
10 winu NM1 #i/nu = wine Cf. Linear B wono #oi/noj

Highly probable NM1 candidates include:

1 damate PGS NM1 Da/mate = Damater Cf. Linear B Damate -or- da/matej = related to the
village
2 jate/jateo NM1 i0a=th/r = physician
3 kadi MOSE NM1 kadi/ (instr. sing.) <- ka/doj = with a jar or vessel for water or wine
4 kami NM1 ka/mi (dat./instr. sing.) <- ka/ma = with unit of land Cf. Linear B ka/ma
5 kiretana NM1 kriqani/aj = like barley, barley (attributive)
6 maza/mazu NM1 ma=za = kneaded or unbaked bread, barley bread/cake
7 odami/odamia NM1 ou0dami/a = no one (fem.)
8 qero NM1 be/loj = arrow, dart
9 sama/samaro PGS or NM1 sama/ro = burial ground Cf. LB samara samaru sama/raCf.
Linear B Sama/ra = place name -or- monument -or- grave mound OR sa/meron = today
10 terikama OMNM1 te/leika/ma = extent of land, i.e. something like acreage, lit. land to its
extent or boundary

31
The most striking example of orthographic metamorphosis from Mycenaean-derived Greek to
Minoan orthography is the masculine singular. Mycenaean derived words in Minoan almost
always have their singular ultimate adjusted to u from the Mycenaean o. Examples abound:

Linear B to Linear A:
Akano to Akanu (Archanes)
akoro -> akaru (field)
kako -> kaku (copper)
kuruko -> kuruku (crocus/saffron)
mare (mari) -> maru (wool)
Rado -> Radu (Latos)
Winado -> Winadu (toponym)
woino -> winu (wine)
iyero -> wireu (priest)

The code MOS following a New Minoan NM1 entry indicates that the Mycenaean-derived New
Minoan term in question was independently researched by Prof. Yuriy Mosenkis, without
whose indispensable coterminous contributions to the field this Lexicon would never have
reached fulfillment. For the actual sources from Mosenkis, see the bibliography below.
Mosenkis (sources):
MOSA Greek grammar in Linear A
MOSB Indo-European Greek Morphology in Linear A
MOSC GREEK WRITTEN LANGUAGE FROM 3000 BC
MOSD ‘MINOAN GREEK’ DIALECT: MORPHOLOGY
MOSE MINOAN GREEK FARMING IN LINEAR A
MOSF Fates of Cretan slaves in the Linear A tablet HT 7
MOSG Greek names of sum and debt in Linear A

NM2 = probable. Note that there are more candidates at NM2 = probable, but I have omitted
even these from this preliminary Lexicon, as they are less likely to withstand the test of
contextual accuracy once cross-correlated with the tablets on which they appear. Prof. Yuriy
Mosenkis has accounted for much more supposed Mycenaean-derived New Minoan
vocabulary than have I. He incorporates words which I categorize as NM2, all of which may or
may not successfully be cross-correlated with one or more Linear A tablets. He also includes a
considerable number of so-called New Minoan terms which I tag as NM3, for which I have
found no evidence whatsoever that they correspond with the contents of one or more Linear
tablets. So in this regard, my lexicon of 165 Mycenaean-derived New Minoan NM1 vocables,
representative of 16 % or a little more of all Minoan vocabulary, is much more circumscribed
than his (proto-) Greek lexicon, which runs to at least 400 words or 39 % of the Minoan
Linear lexicon in toto. In other words, unless I can cross-correlate all of the New Minoan
NM1 terms with at least one or preferably more than one Linear A tablet, I find I must
eschew all other so-called (proto-) Greek vocabulary (italics mine).

Methodology and procedures for deciphering New Minoan NM1 vocabulary, often twinned
with Old Minoan, on Linear A tablets and fragments:

The methodology we have adopted for the decipherment of New Minoan NM1 vocabulary on
Linear A tablets and fragments involves the determination of the relevance of such vocabulary

32
in context. The methodology involves two procedures:

1. Establishing such relevance at two discrete levels: (a) when the Mycenaean-derived New
Minoan NM1 vocabulary appears in the context of a single Linear A tablet, repeated on no
other tablets (b) when the NM1 vocabulary is repeated on at least two tablets and sometimes
on a few more.

2. Cross-referencing the incidence of New Minoan NM1 vocabulary with Old Minoan
vocabulary on the same tablet, and in those cases where both NM1 and OM vocabulary is
repeated across tablets (especially on several from Haghia Triada). When the number of New
Minoan NM1 exograms, as defined by Colin Renfrew [4] under the rubric, cognitive
archaeology,

X (the symbol, or signifier) represents Y (the thing signified) in context C. The context,
as we shall see, is always important, because the relationship between X and Y is usually
an arbitrary one. For instance, we have already seen that in the context of the English
language, it is the word ‘bird’ that represents the feathered, flying creature Y, while in the
context of French X takes the form oiseau. (pp. 101-102)

exceeds the number of Old Minoan lexemes, the chances for an accurate decipherment of the
NM1s are greater than in those instances where the number of New Minoan NM1 exograms is
approximately equal to the number of Old Minoan words, while the chances in the second
instance are significantly greater than those where the number of Old Minoan lexemes exceed
the number of New Minoan words. In mathematical terms: (if NM1 > OM) > (if NM1 = OM) >
(if NM1 < OM).

But there is more to it than merely the proportion of NM1 to OM words on any single tablet.
By context we mean not only the incidence of one or more NM1 New Minoan words on a
single Linear A tablet or fragment, but the presence of one or more NM1 New Minoan terms
on more than one Linear A tablet or fragment.

So the chances for a more accurate decipherment of any NM1 New Minoan exogram are
greater when we have more than one tablet at our disposal and when the number of NM1
terms exceeds that of the totality of Old Minoan words on all such tablets. Context is therefore
either tabular, meaning it is restricted to one tablet or fragment or cross-tabular. The latter
always trumps the former ( italics mine).

Linear A fragment PH 7 (Phaistos) serves as one example of a Linear A inscription comprised

entirely of so-called Mycenaean-derived exograms. Even though this is a fragment, enough of
it is intact to allow us to draw the conclusion that in fact its text is Mycenaean-derived New
Minoan NM1:

33
All of the words on this tablet appear to be Mycenaean-derived New Minoan. Even though this
is a Linear A fragment, it seems to incorporate most of the contents of the original tablet, part
of which is missing, since the text makes perfect sense in context, even in the absence of any
other comparable Linear A tablet.

And here is another, Linear A tablet Zf 1, the exquisite golden pin in the Ayios Nikolaus
Museum, Crete, which is also ostensibly inscribed in Mycenaean-derived New Minoan NM1:

While it is debatable whether or not this beautifully crafted golden pin is in fact inscribed
solely in Mycenaean-derived New Minoan, once again, if we accept the premise that it is, the
inscription, “in fine craftsmanship, violets parallel to violets, a gift to Kaniama, from her
father”, makes perfect sense.

34
For our third and fourth examples, we have the Linear A vase rim inscription PE Z b 3 from
Petras, and a badly damaged, yet still legible tablet from Gournia. On the first we find the two
Linear A words akara and kitanasijase. Of these, the first, akara, is susceptible to two
entirely different interpretations, either of which makes eminent sense in context. These are
(a) “a border”, from non-extant but credible akaru or akaro, and (b) “a field”, both in the
archaic accusative terminating in a, which appears to be a Minoan oblique case actually
inherited by Mycenaean Greek.

Next we have kitanasijase, once again in a Minoan oblique case, ki/rtanasia <- ki/rtanoj,
apparently derived from a non-extant but plausible nominative singular kitanu or kitano,
equivalent to Linear B kitano ki/rtanoj = terebinth tree. If this is the case, then the word
means precisely that, but in an oblique case in this context, the case probably being
instrumental plural, what with the internal syllabogram si. The penultimate and ultimate jase
may be an entirely different Old Minoan word, if we accept the premise that the Minoan
language is agglutinative, which I do. And if this is the case, then jase may conceivably mean,
“with stones” (instrumental plural), as it terminates in se, a variant of si. And if this is the
case, then the reading, “a border with stones around terebinth trees” or more simply put, “a
stone border around terebinth trees” passes muster.

The fourth is the badly damaged tablet (or recto/verso fragment) which, in spite of its pitiable
condition, is still legible. And once again, the inscription, if we take it to be Mycenaean-
derived, makes perfect sense: “water (used to douse) with buckets a firebrand or burning
piece of wood”. Once again, critics are bound to contest this interpretation, finding it arbitrary
― which in fact it is. And yet, when we stop to think about it, aren’t all decipherments of
Linear A tablets arbitrary? This being so, we are entitled to adopt this interpretation, since it
makes sense, just as much as do our other decipherments supra.

35
2. PGS = pre-Greek substratum:

Exograms falling within the pre-Greek substratum are found, not only in Minoan, but in
several other ancient languages antecedent to either proto-Greek or Mycenaean-derived or
Mycenaean Greek and archaic Greek. Since we run across some of these words in Minoan, it
does not matter one iota whether or not any particular language in which eponyms or
toponyms are found is Indo-European or not, given that the general consensus among
historical linguists is that Minoan is not an Indo-European language, as far as we know. I say
general consensus, because consensus is never universal in linguistics, nor should it be.
Examples are:
1 Akanu/Akanuzati PGS TOP A0rxa/nej = Archanes (Crete)
2 depa/depu PGS de/paj de/pu (acc.?)= cup Cf. Linear B dipa di/paj & Homeric de/pa dipaja
PGS di/paia <- di/paj de/paj = from a cup
3 Idamate/Idamete PGS ONO 0Idama/te = Mother goddess of Mount Ida
4 kanaka PGS kna/ka (arch. acc. of respect) = saffron Cf Linear B kanako kna/koj
5 kuruku PGS kro/koj = crocus, saffron
6 Paito = Phaistos PGS TOP Cf Linear B Paito Faisto/j
7 punikaso PGS NM1 funi/kasoj = crimson, red (of wine) Cf. Linear B ponikiya ponikiyo
foini/kioj = crimson
8 Rukito PGS TOP Cf. Linear B Rukito Lu/kinqoj
9 sama/samaro PGS or NM1 sama/ro = burial ground Cf. LB samara samaru sama/raCf.
Linear B Sama/ra = place name -or- monument -or- grave mound OR sa/meron = today
10 sasame PGS sasa/me = sesame Cf. Linear B sasama sasa/ma
11 Setoija PGS TOP Cf. Linear B Setoiya Shtoi/a

Examples of pre-Greek substratum words not found on Linear A tablets and fragments, but
which were probably in the Linear A vernacular vocabulary, include:
1 apero PGS a1mpeloj = a vine Cf. Linear B apero
2 ditamana PGS = dittany
3 keda PGS = cedar
4 kikadi PGS = cicada (cricket)
5 pimata PGS = pimento

36
6 sedina PGS = celery Cf. Linear B serino se/linon
7 tarasa PGS = sea Cf. Linear B tarasa qa/lassa
8 tarawita PGS = terebinth tree Cf. Linear B kitano ki/rtanoj & timito ti/rminqoj
9 toraka PGS qw/rac = breastplate, cuirass = Linear B toraka
10 turunu PGS NM1 qo/rnoj = throne Cf. Linear B tono qo/rnoj
11 wanaka PGS #a/nac = king

It is reasonable to suppose that many pre-Greek substratum words which do appear in some
or several ancient languages antecedent to ancient Greek probably also existed in the Minoan
language, even though there is no concrete circumstantial evidence to support this hypothesis.
Chances are that those PGS words absent from the Linear A tablets and fragments existed in
the spoken or vernacular.

3. ONO = onomastics, personal names + TOP = topomastics, place names

NOTE: Some place names are derived from the Minoan Language Blog,
http://minoablog.blogspot.ca/2010/08/pre-greek-place-names-of-aegean.html

Several issues plague the so-called decipherment of eponyms or toponyms in Linear A. These
are: (a) Is any particular eponym or toponym (EPOTOPO) Mycenaean-derived NM1 New
Minoan Greek or (b) does any EPOTOPO fall in the pre-Greek substratum? In fact hundreds
of toponyms have been identified by Andras Zeke of the Minoan Language Blog [5] as falling
in the pre-Greek substratum. (c) Is any EPOTOPO Old Minoan? Also, given that many
historical linguistics consider Old Minoan (the Minoan substratum) to be an agglutinative
language [6], how can we really know whether any Minoan word we consider to be EPOTOPO
is in actuality just that? (d) Consequently, agglutination makes it very difficult to distinguish
between exograms which may (or may not) be either eponyms or toponyms on the one hand
or may (or may not) be agglutinative strings on the other. (e) In addition, it is difficult at best
to determine whether or not any particular word which we identify as EPOTOPO is either an
eponym or toponym. (f) Some place names are derived from the Minoan Language Blog,
http://minoablog.blogspot.ca/2010/08/pre-greek-place-names-of-aegean.html
The primary defining characteristics of pre-Greek substratum Topomastics flagged by Andras
Zeke in the Minoan Language Blog are: (a) that they terminate with the ultimate -nos or -na
or (b) the ultimates are -nthos, ntha or ndos or (c) they end in – sos/-sa or -ssos/-ssa. Only
these toponyms can be identified as plausible within the ambit of Linear A. Yet the only
example I have been able to find as tentative in Linear A is Kiso=Kissos. In other words, the
rest of the topomastics in Linear A do not follow the patterns outlined by Andras Zeke. So
most of the eponyms and toponyms I have tentatively identified remain in doubt. But not all.
Those which occur in both Linear A and Linear B, regardless of variances in orthography, are
definitely toponyms common to both Minoan and Mycenaean. In fact, it is reasonable to
assume that all of the Linear A toponyms equivalent to Linear B counterparts either fall within
the pre-Greek substratum or they are Mycenaean-derived. Toponyms common to Linear A
and Linear B:

Asara2 TOP = Linear B Asaro A0sa/roj

Asuja TOP Cf Linear B Asiwiya A0si/#ia
Dikate TOP = Mount Dikte Cf. Linear B Dikatade Diktai/oj
Dupu3re TOP Cf. Linear B Dupu2razo Dupurai/zoj

37
Kutiti TOP (locative sing.) Kutaistos Cf. LB Kutaito Ku/taistoj
Paito TOP = Phaistos PGS TOP Cf Linear B Paito Faisto/j
Qara2wa ONO/TOP Cf. Linear B Qara2wo Galai/oj or Garai/oj
Raja/Raju ONO TOP 9Rai/a = Raia PGS TOP Cf. Linear B Raya
Rukito PGS TOP Cf. Linear B Rukito Lu/kinqoj
Setoija PGS TOP Cf. Linear B Setoiya Shtoi/a
Sukirita/Sukiriteija TOP = Sybrita Cf. Linear B Sukirita Su/grita
Tainaro TOP Tai/na=ron Taenaros promontory and town (not Linear B, but Greek)
Tejare TOP Cf. Linear B Tejaro qei/aroj = place of the gods?
Uminase OM TOP Cf. Linear B Aminiso A0mni/ssoj = harbour

If on the other hand, s0-called eponyms and toponyms we have tentatively isolated in Linear
A are neither in the pre-Greek substratum nor Mycenaean-derived, but appear to be Old
Minoan, what are they? Is it even possible to distinguish between what ostensibly appears to
be an eponym or a toponym ? Are they even eponyms or toponyms, or are they on the other
hand agglutinated strings (implying that they are not EPOTOPO at all)?

Examples abound:

EPOTOPO of uncertain origin: Arenesidi ONO? Asasumaise TOP? Idunesi TOP Ijapame TOP
Ikesedesute TOP Japametu TOP Japanidami TOP Kanijami ONO Kaniamis (female name)?
Kasidizuitanai TOP Kiso PGS TOP Kissos Kosaiti TOP Mekidi ONO Megi/di <- Me/gaj = the
Great Mesenurutu TOP Midemidiu TOP Naisizamikao TOP Ra2madami TOP (locative
sing.?), i.e. at Raimadamos Rera2tusi TOP (locative sing.?) Reratarumi TOP (locative sing.?)
Risaipa3dai TOP Risumasuri TOP (locative sing.?) Rujamime TOP Sejasinataki TOP
Seterimuajaku ONO Sijanakarunau TOP Ta2merakodisi TOP (locative sing.?) Ta2rimarusi
TOP (locative sing.?) Tenatunapa3ku TOP Tesudesekei TOP Tinakarunau TOP Tita
PGS/ONO =Titan Ti=ta/n Tumitizase TOP Turunuseme ONO/TOP
Unarukanasi/Unarukanati ONO/TOP (locative sing.?) Wasatomaro NM1 + OM TOP = the
name of a town & Wijasumatiti TOP (locative sing.?) = at Wijasumatitos & Wiraremite TOP
Zadeu/Zadeujuraa ONO (masc./fem.). NOTE that most of the above entries, which appear to
be masculine or neuter, are toponyms.

If feminine: Daipita TOP Ikurina ONO TOP Inajapaqa ONO Itinisa PGS ONO? = female
resident of Itanos? Ititikuna TOP Kasikidaa ONO/TOP? Ketesunata ONO/TOP Kina PGS
TOP Kinna Kupatikidadia ONO TOP Masuja ONO? Nakininuta ONO Natanidua ONO
Nenaarasaja TOP Nutiuteranata TOP Pamanuita ONO Qa2ra2wa ONO/TOP? (variation)
Redamija ONO Repu2dudatapa TOP Seimasusaa TOP Sejarapaja ONO/TOP Sekiriteseja
ONO Sesasinunaa ONO Sikira/Sikirita PGS ONO/TOP Sirumarita2 TOP? (fem. diminutive)
Suria TOP Teizatima ONO Tidama ONO? Tikuneda ONO Timunuta ONO Titisutisa ONO
Tunija TOP Waduna ONO/TOP Cf. LB Waduna Wadunimi TOP = the place or town of
Waduna? (locative sing.?)

NOTE that of the EPOTOPO in the feminine, most appear to be eponyms.

So where onomastics and topomastics are concerned, with the sole exception of those
common to Linear A and Linear B, we are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Are all, most

38
or just some of eponyms and toponyms we identify as such in Linear A really that or if not,
how many are instead agglutinations [6] of OM Old Minoan words or even of OM and NM
Mycenaean-derived New Minoan vocabulary? The issue is a thorny one, for which no sound
resolution can be found. At any rate, we should not be surprised that there are as many
eponyms and toponyms in Linear A as there are, as they proliferate in Linear B.

4: Old Minoan substratum = the original Old Minoan language prior to the advent of
Mycenaean-derived New Minoan vocabulary:

NOTE that I assign this KEY only to Old Minoan words I have been able to decipher or
tentatively decipher to date + OMNM1 = any word which is a composite of Old Minoan and
New Minoan. Old Minoan words I have been unable to decipher do not bear this code. These
are in the majority.

Preamble: Smithsonian: This 3,500-Year-Old Greek Tomb Upended What We Thought We

Knew About the Roots of Western Civilization...

Only the main center of Knossos was restored for posterity, but with its art, architecture
and even tombs adopting a more mainland style. Its scribes switched from Linear A to
Linear B, using the alphabet to write not the language of the Minoans, but Mycenaean
Greek. It’s a crucial transition that archaeologists are desperate to understand, says
Brogan. “What brings about the collapse of the Minoans, and at the same time what
causes the emergence of the Mycenaean palace civilization?” [7]

If then the scribes at Knossos, Haghia Triada, Phaistos, Zakros and elsewhere switched so
freely back and forth from Linear A to Linear B, is it not reasonable to assume that even when
they were writing in Linear A, at least some of the words on many tablets must have been
inscribed in Mycenaean-derived New Minoan and/or in the pre-Greek substratum, most often
in conjunction with Old Minoan vocabulary? As it turns out, the answer is yes, especially on
Linear A tablets from Haghia Triada, notably HT 6 8 11 18 85 86 87 94 95 114 117 & 121, Ky Za
2 from Kythera, MA 1 and Ma2 (Malia) and ZA 14 & 20 from Zakros:

Examples of Linear A tablets inscribed in Old Minoan in conjunction with Mycenaean-derived

New Minoan:

We note in particular in the inscriptions on the vases below that once again the exogram
kitanasija = of/from terebinth trees (genitive singular) appears on the edges of these rims.
This lends further credence to our interpretation of the inscription PE Zb 3 (Petras), which is
also curiously enough another vase rim inscription ― sheer co-incidence? Linear A scribes
may have made similar inscriptions on several vase rims, including on those which are not
extant. The fact that practically the same inscription appears on two vase rims from the same
place lends credence to this assumption.

39
Moreover, aka can readily be interpreted as aska (archaic acc., here Latinized) from <-askos,
meaning “wine skin”, implying that wine has been poured from one of these vases into a single
wine skin, and further implying the the vase is small, given that if one were to pour wine from
a large vase, one would have to pour it into several wine skins. Which one of the vases above is
the smallest is difficult to determine, but one of them has to be.

Next we have Linear A tablet HT 114, on which the Mycenaean-derived word kireta2 (kiretai),
which clearly means “barley”, appears in conjunction with the ideogram ni, which as we know
stands for “figs”. The rest of the text on this tablet, consisting as it does of single syllabograms,
is open to contention.

40
Finally, we have Linear A tablet HT 86 (Haghia Triada), which as we can see, appears yet
again to be inscribed partially in Mycenaean-derived New Minoan and partially in Old
Minoan. This is one of the most significant of all Linear A tablets, because it so closely
parallels HT 95 below. The fact that the text of HT 86 so closely mirrors that of HT 95 lends
further credence to our decipherment of both of these tablets together. We find approximately
equal parts of Mycenaean-derived New Minoan and Old Minoan vocabulary on HT 86.

Here we have the New Minoan vocabulary on HT 86:

akaru, dideru (equivalent to Linear B didero), dame & minute

Old Minoan vocabulary on HT 86:
kunisu, saru, qara2wa (qaraiwa) & adu

We must pay special heed to the terms akaru and dideru in New Minoan, as these in turn
signify “field” (archaic acc.), where all of these crops are obviously grown and didero, which is
Linear A for “einkorn wheat” . As for the Old Minoan terminology, we have kunisu, which is
“emmer wheat” and adu, which is a very large unit of dry measurement, probably “bales”.
Astonishingly, the text as a whole admirably hangs together, and all the more so when
compared with that of HT 95.

HT 86 (Haghia Triada) appears on the next page

Tablets inscribed (almost) exclusively in Old Minoan, i.e. in the Minoan substratum,
apparently (though not necessarily) prior to the advent of Mycenaean-derived New Minoan
vocabulary:

On the other hand, many Linear A tablets, some again from Haghia Triada and others of
diverse provenance, were inscribed (almost) exclusively in Old Minoan (OM). Among these we
may count: AP ZA 2 from Apodoulou, HT 1 7 12 28 31 40 88 89 91 92 93 96 103 116 128 120
122 123-124 128 & 133 (Haghia Triada), KH 5 KH 10 X & 11 (Khania), Za 10 X (Knossos), KO
Za 1 (Kophinas), PK Za 11 (Palaikastro), PH 31 (Phaistos), Zf 31 from Mavro Spelio, Zg 1 & 2
from Troy, Ty Zb 4 (Tylissos) & ZA 8 11 15 & 21 (Zakros).

The paramount question is, how can we possibly decipher Linear A tablets which are inscribed
exclusively in the Old Minoan substratum, i.e. in the original Minoan language? Believe it or
not, we can, at least in those few cases where the same vocabulary is repeated over and over
on multiple tablets. As we can see from the list above, several tablets from Haghia Triada
alone are inscribed solely in Old Minoan. But if we presumably can decipher at least some of
these tablets, the question is how? Once again, we must turn to the concept of context, but in
this case, context incorporates a much broader compass than mere textual context, even when
cross-tabular. In fact, far more. Unless we can open ourselves to up a much more far-reaching
scope for what is normally restricted to contextual content, we shall get absolutely nowhere.

41
But there is a methodology and there are procedures which work, and they do so admirably
well. Returning once again to Colin Renfrew, I quote verbatim and at great length, as the
significance of his thesis has wide-spread and profound implications for the decipherment of
at least some Linear A tablets inscribed solely in Old Minoan (OM). I urge you to pay
particular attention to all the text and passages I have italicized, as they are of great
significance to our own parallel thesis [8]:

It goes beyond this in emphasising that many of the key symbols have a material reality;
they are material things, not just words or insubstantial representations. (pg. 103) ...
passim ... So too is the new emphasis upon material culture, and the way material
symbols come to have considerable importance ascribed to them. (pg. 106) ... passim ...
In defining symbols, we are not just playing with words, but recognising features of the
material world with which human individuals come to engage. (pg. 110) ... passim ...
the brain exists in the body and that the mind is embodied. (pg. 111) ... passim ... Many
institutional facts, as we might define them, may appear to be rather abstract concepts.

42
 But they work in practice through social convention and with the use of material
symbols. (pg. 117) ... passim ... Some material symbols, then, are constitutive in their
material reality. They are not disembodied verbal concepts, or not initially. They have
an indissoluble reality of substance. They are substantive. The symbol (in its real, actual
substance) actually precedes the concept. Or, if that is almost claiming too much, they
are self-referential. The symbol cannot exist without the substance, and the material
reality of the substance precedes the symbolic role that is ascribed to it when it comes to
embody such an institutional fact. (pp. 118-119).

Suffice it to say, this is one loaded argument in favour of context as firmly founded, not merely
in writing or exograms contextually set in inscriptions, but in the real, substantial world in
which we humans actually live and have always lived, and in which our ancestors, the
Minoan and Mycenaeans, and for that matter everyone else subsisted in every settlement (i.e.
on settled land) from the late Neolithic onward to the Early and Middle Bronze Ages, when
settlements became citadels and eventually cities, Knossos being a cardinal example of the
latter, with a population estimated somewhere around 55,000, about the same size as ancient
Athens in the fifth century BCE. So the substance of Colin Renfrew’s reliance on the material
reality of the symbolism of exograms, embodied in the real world, is a cornerstone to the
decipherment of Old Minoan Linear A. (italics mine)

Renfrew has hit the proverbial nail right on the head. Armed with his powerful and highly
associative cognitions, we can now proceed to actually decipher, not just one or two, but
several Old Minoan Linear A tablets, if not in their entirety, at least for the most part. And
here is how. We proceed from the following hypotheses supported by actual circumstantial
evidence at the level of cognitive archaeology.

HT 95 (Haghia Triada), dealing emmer and einkorn wheat, one of the most significant of all
Linear A tablets:

Linear A tablet, HT 95 (Haghia Triada), which deals with various grain crops, i.e. emmer and
einkorn wheat, millet and spelt, and with flax, is unquestionably one of the most important
Linear A tablets, with the possible exception of HT 86, dealing with the same roster of grains.

When I first deciphered kunisu and dideru, I believed that I had nabbed kunisu as “emmer
wheat” and dideru “einkorn wheat”, but I was not quite sure I had them in the right order.
Thanks to Cyrus G. Gordon, who makes the following statement:

... Linear A ku-ni-su must mean some kind of wheat because it is followed by the
WHEAT determinative. Now kunnisu is a Semitic word for “emmer wheat” so that
Linear A ku-ni-su WHEAT “emmer wheat” not only adds a word to our Minoan
vocabulary but it also establishes Ventris’s (sic) readings of the ku, ni and su signs.
(italics mine).

we now know beyond doubt that kunisu does mean emmer wheat, just as I had initially
suspected. Consequently, since these two types of wheat appear conjointly here and very
close together on HT 86, we are left to draw the conclusion that dideru means einkorn wheat.
Now dideru appears 4 times on HT 86 & 95, while kunisu appears once on HT 10 & HT 79,
and 4 times on HT 86 & 95, for a total of 6 times. So it pretty much goes without saying that

43
these two grains play a significant role in the Minoan diet. This should come as no surprise to
anyone familiar with Late Neolithic and Bronze Age Mediterranean and Middle Eastern diets,
since these two grains were predominant in all societies in these regions.

As for dame and qera2u (qeraiu), proper identification is a bit problematic, because we do not
know which is which. This is why I have tagged dame with reference [1], signifying it could
mean either spelt or millet, and qera2u (qeraiu) with [3], meaning either millet or spelt (the
reverse). But the problem is that we are confronted with 2 permutations here. By this we
mean that dame could mean either spelt or millet or vice versa, and qera2u (qeraiu) millet or
spelt or millet or vice versa. Either way, dame means one of the two, while qera2u (qeraiu)
the other. But how do we know this? It just so happens that, after emmer and einkorn wheat,

44
the next most common grains in the Bronze Age Mediterranean and Middle East were millet
and spelt. So chances are good that dame and qera2 (qeraiu) each references one or the other.

The reference note [2] with flax indicates two things, (a) first that flax is in an oblique case,
probably instrumental, i.e. with flax, since the nominative is sara2 (sarai) & (b) the standard
unit of measurement is probably not something a bushel, because flax is extremely light,
which explains the huge total of 1393 for flax. What it is we shall never know, since after all we
have no real concept of what any standard unit of measurement, dry or liquid, was either in
Minoan Linear A or Mycenaean Linear B. These civilizations are so remote in the distant past
that any attempt at determining standard units of measurement amounts to nothing more
than speculation.

Nevertheless, we find that we are able to decipher HT 95 with a reasonable degree of accuracy,
and in the case of kunisu and dideru, with complete accuracy. So we can now say with
confidence that these two grains have been conclusively deciphered once and for all time,
thanks to Cyrus H. Gordon.

Statistical incidence of various types of grains on Linear A tablets from Haghia Triada and
elsewhere:

akaru NM1 a0gar/u <- a0gro/j = field HT 2 (20+) HT 86 X2 (20+ )

TOTAL = 40+
situ NM1 si/tu si/tun <- si/ton = wheat 20 + sitetu = with wheat 1 (Zakros ZA 20) Cf. Linear B
sito si/ton
TOTAL = 41
barley
kireta2 (kiretai) NM1 kri/qai = barley HT 85 (1) + HT 129 (33)
TOTAL = 34
kiretana NM1 kriqani/aj = barley-like HT 2 (54+) HT 8 X 2 (5) HT 108 (1) HT 120 (60)
TOTAL = 120
einkorn wheat
dideru = einkorn wheat HT 86 X 2 (2nd. trunc.) (20) HT 95 X 2 (20) Cf. Linear B didero
TOTAL = 40
emmer wheat
kunisu = emmer wheat HT 10 (0) HT 86 X 2 (40+) HT 95 X 2 (30)
TOTAL = 70+
flax
[sara2 = flax HT 18 (10) HT 28 X 2 (21) HT 30 (0) HT 32-34 (0) HT 90 (20) HT 93 (20) HT
94 (5) HT 97 (0) HT 99 (4+) HT 100-102 (985+) HT 105 (234) HT 114 (10) HT 121 (5) HT 125
(2) HT 130 (0)
TOTAL = 1306+
+ saru (oblique case) HT 86 X 3 (41+) HT 95 X 2 (30) HT 123+124 (16 )
TOTAL = 87+
TOTAL for all references to flax = 1393]
spelt or millet
dame = spelt or millet HT 86 (20) HT 95 X2 (20) HT 120 (74)
TOTAL = 94

45
millet or spelt
qera2u/qera2wa = millet or spelt HT 1 (197) HT 95 X2 (17)
TOTAL = 214
durare = durum wheat? Knossos KN Zc 7 (0)
TOTAL = 0
minute = a type of grain -or- “and for a month” HT 86 (20) HT 95 X2 (20) HT 106 (6+)
TOTAL = 46+
pura2 = a type of grain HT 28 (6) HT 116 (45) KN 54 (0)
TOTAL = 51
qanuma = ditto HT 116 (20) KH 88 (Khania) (10)
TOTAL = 20

standard units of measurement on all Linear A tablets:

adu HT 85 (0) HT 86 (0) HT 88 (20) HT 92 (680) HT 95 (0) HT 99 (0) HT 133 (55)
(bales?)
TOTAL = 755
adureza (0) = standard unit of dry measurement, something like a bushel
dureza (7 ) = variant of the same
TOTAL = 7
kireza ( 42) = standard unit of measurement for figs, dates or grapes = 1 basket
TOTAL = 42
reza (67+ ) = standard unit of linear measurement
TOTAL = 67+
tereza (0) = standard unit of liquid measurement

The statistical analysis above very much tends to reinforce our decipherments of various types
of grains and of flax. Whereas the decipherments for emmer wheat (kunisu), einkorn wheat
(dideru) and flax (sara2/sarai) seem sound enough, translations of the remaining types of
grains are more or less debatable, as we have pointed out in this sectional commentary.
Nevertheless, we have come a long way towards passable snapshot of grain crops in Bronze
Age Minoan Crete, and indeed in the Mediterranean and the Middle East in that era.

Cross-correlative retrospective extrapolation (CCRE) from Mycenaean Linear B to Linear A:

Cross-correlative retrospective extrapolation (CCRE) from Mycenaean Linear B to Linear A is

yet another approach to the decipherment of Linear A. This methodology relies on the
assumption that, if a given Linear A tablet so closely resembles a Linear B counterpart that
almost all of the vocabulary on it is a mirror-image of that on a parallel Linear B tablet, then
we may assume with some confidence that overall the text of the former (Linear A tablet) is a
very close match with that of the latter (its Linear B counterpart). It just so happens that of all
the extant Linear A tablets one and one only fills the bill, and that one is HT 31 (Haghia
Triada), which deals exclusively and at length with various types of pottery (vessels). Its
Linear B counterpart is none other than Pylos TA 641-1952 (Ventris), co-incidentally the very
first deciphered by Michael Ventris in 1952. Linear B tablet Pylos TA 641-1952 (Ventris)
actually serves as a one of a kind of “Rosetta Stone”, a unique and very close match with
Linear A HT 31 (Haghia Triada). But how is this possible? Does there exist a Rosetta stone for

46
Linear A in general? The short answer is no. But if that is the case, is it possible that at least
one Linear B tablet can be such a close match with its Linear A counterpart that it can and
does serve as its so-called “Rosetta Stone”? In this one instance only and no other, the short
answer is yes.

In an article I have submitted to a major international journal, and which is due for
publication early in 2018, I posit this thesis:

A considerable number of philologists and historical linguists, some of them amateurs, claim
to have deciphered the Minoan language, yet no one has ever formulated a convincing
decipherment. We advance a unique and entirely untested approach to unravelling the text of
Minoan Linear A tablet HT 31 (Haghia Triada), based on the principle of cross-correlative
retrogressive extrapolation (CCRE) from Mycenaean Linear B to Linear A. HT 31 so closely
parallels Mycenaean Linear B tablet, Pylos Py TA 641-1952 (Ventris) that the latter effectively
serves as a kind of “Rosetta Stone” for the former.

Glen Gordon, in the February 2107 issue of Journey to Ancient Civilizations, poses this
thought-provoking question, “If a Minoan version of a Rosetta Stone pops up... passim...,
watch public interest rise tenfold.” The answer to his question is finally upon us. Actually, it
has been staring us in the face for a very long time. It is none other than Linear B tablet Pylos
Py TA 641-1952 (Ventris), which is the “Rosetta Stone” for Minoan Linear A tablet HT 31
(Haghia Triada).

The parallels between the ideograms on these two tablets are so remarkable we can postulate
that we are dealing with very similar text on both tablets, although in a different order (not
that this matters much):

47
The process I have coined whereby we are able to determine the lexicographic values of the
Old Minoan Linear A terms commensurate with their Mycenaean Linear B counterparts I
designate as cross-correlative retrogressive extrapolation (CCRE). This methodology allows
us to extrapolate the (almost) precise semiotic values for each of the Old Minoan Linear A
words in turn attached to their respective ideograms. Since the name of each and every vessel
on HT 31 is spelled out in full, we find ourselves facing the curious co-incidence that all of
these Old Minoan A terms appear analogous to their Mycenaean Linear B counterparts on the
Pylos tablet. All we need do is cross-correlate each Minoan Linear A term for a pottery or
vessel type with its counterpart on the Pylos tablet and voilà, we have nailed down every
single vessel type on HT 31. From this point on, it becomes only a matter of time for us to
translate practically all of HT 31 from Minoan Linear A into English. It is of course necessary
to draw a clear distinction between the word order of the terms on HT 31 (Haghia Triada) and
of those on Linear B Pylos TA 641-1952 (Ventris). But the word order is actually irrelevant to
the significance of the terminology for the various kinds of pottery on either tablet, when we
come to cross-correlate the vocabulary on the former with that of the latter.

The reading of HT 31 (Haghia Triada) so closely resembles that of Pylos TA 641-1952 (Ventris)
that it is astonishing no historical linguist has ever noticed this before. The only point at which
the text of the two tablets is at odds is in the total tally of the number of each type of small
vessels on HT 31 versus Pylos TA 641-1952. The totals for the smaller vessels on HT 31 are
much greater. But this alone does not invalidate the decipherment.

48
5. LIG = ligatured logograms

Ligatured logograms, i.e. composites of 2 or more Linear A syllabograms, appear frequently in

Linear A. Until now, no Linear A linguist, not even Prof. John G. Younger, has accounted for
anywhere near the total number of ligatured logograms in Linear A. By ligatured logograms
we mean two or more Linear A syllabograms bound together as one unit. No previous
researcher, not even Andreas Zeke of the Minoan Language Blog, has isolated any more than
10 ligatured logograms. But there are at least 22 of them. The difficulty is that we cannot tell
from any ligatured logogram which syllabogram is supposed to be the first in the series, and
which the second, third etc. Since some ligatured logograms run to as many as many as 4
syllabograms, it becomes a real challenge to try and untangle their “correct” order. Hence, we
cannot always successfully reconstruct the Linear A words of which these ligatured logograms
are constructed. However, the prospects are far from bleak. Wherever we are confronted with
ligatures of only 2 syllabograms, the chances are we can get it right from the outset. Since
there are always at least 2 syllabograms bound together, it is impossible to determine which
syllabogram comes first. This means that in the case of 2 ligatured syllabograms, the word
represented may be reversed. For instance, in the case of the first ligature in the table below,
the ligature could be either aka or kae, although the first is more plausible than the second in
this case. If the first ligature is indeed aka, then it is highly likely that it is the Linear A
equivalent of the Greek word aska, which is the archaic accusative of askos (here Latinized),
meaning “a leather bag or wine skin”. In the case of the third, we have either kuwa, the exact
Linear A equivalent of Linear B kowa, which deciphered means “girl”or if reversed, waku,
which in ancient Greek is agu (Linear A orthography) or agos, meaning “any matter of
religious awe/guilt/sacrifice”, of which the latter definition is the more convincing. All in all,
of the 22 ligatured logograms, 12 or over half are susceptible to translation into Greek. If
anything, this illustrates the great impact of the Mycenaean-derived superstratum on Linear
A. In this table, only 10 ligatures appear to be in Old Minoan, i.e. the original Minoan
language, aka the Minoan substratum.

49
Conclusions:

There is no such thing as the decipherment of Linear A. There are however diverse approaches
to its decipherment. Methodology and procedures differ depending on the nature of
inscriptions on Linear A tablets:
1. If a Linear A tablet is inscribed entirely in what appears to be Mycenaean-derived New
Minoan vocabulary, we must verify its validity, in so far as this is possible. This objective is
difficult to realize whenever we are confronted with a Linear A tablet on which all or most of
the words are found on no other Linear A tablets, which is 89.4 % of the time. Such words
include akiro NM1 a1kairoj = not in season, unseasonable -or- a1grioj = living in the fields;
esija MOSA NM1 e3sti/a = hearth of a house; and pa3katari NM1 pagkra/dh = all-powerful,
almighty, all-ruling. On the other hand, in those instances where the vocabulary appears on
two or more tablets, the chances are that the words are in fact valid. Examples are: depa/depu
PGS de/paj de/pu (acc.?)= cup Cf. Linear B dipa di/paj & Homeric de/pa; kireta2 (kiretai) NM1
kri/qai = barley; and kitanasija/kitanasijase NM1 kitanisija (gen. sing.) ki/rtanasia <-
ki/rtanoj = terebinth tree Cf. Linear B kitano ki/rtanoj. In the second instance, the procedure
of cross-correlative comparison between two or more tablets comes into in effect.
2. If a Linear A tablet is inscribed in both Mycenaean-derived New Minoan (NM1) and Old
Minoan, decipherment is a bit more problematic. In those cases where the New Minoan
vocabulary predominates, it is more likely that decipherment of both types of exograms is
correct. In those instances where the reverse applies, the chances are greater that
decipherment is less reliable. The methodology is mathematical; the procedure depends on
equations established by Colin Renfrew and by myself in the section Methodology and
procedures for deciphering New Minoan NM1 vocabulary, often twinned with Old Minoan,
on Linear A tablets and fragments: above.
3. Since almost all words in the pre-Greek substratum existed in several ancient languages,
including Minoan, antecedent to Mycenaean and archaic Greek, we can rest assured that such
words are accurately deciphered. Examples are: damate PGS NM1 Da/mate = Damater Cf.
Linear B Damate; keda PGS = cedar and rosa = rose. Although a few pre-Greek substratum
exograms, such as ditamana PGS = dittany; keda PGS = cedar; tarasa PGS = sea Cf. Linear B
tarasa qa/lassa, do not appear anywhere on Linear A tablets, it is reasonable to suppose that
they surfaced in the vernacular.
4. Topomastics and Onomastics: the requisite procedures dependent on the methodology for
the decipherment of toponyms and eponyms run through several permutations and
combinations. Even with these procedures, we can never really be certain whether or not the
toponyms and eponyms we seem to have deciphered are in fact what we claim them to be,
with the sole exception of topomastics/epomastics which are common to both Linear A and
Linear B. In this case alone, we can be reasonably sure that they are what we claim them to be.
5. Old Minoan: there is one fundamental methodology which allows us to decipher at least a
few Linear A tablets inscribed solely in Old Minoan, which we designate as cross-correlation.
Two procedures are subsumed under this methodology: (a) cross-correlation between two or
more Linear a tablets, with no reference whatsoever to Linear B and (b) cross-correlative
retrospective extrapolation (CCRE) from one and one only Mycenaean Linear B tablet, Pylos
TA 641-1952 (Ventris) to its close counterpart, HT 31 (Haghia Triada). Since these procedures
are explained in great detail above, they bear no repetition.
6. Ligatured logograms: the methodology we must rely on here is somewhat different from
any applicable to the 5 precious categories. Essentially, it involves the procedure of

50
permutations/combinations, which alone can make any sense at all of ligatured logograms.

Thus, when we come to draw the linguistic map of Linear A, we find ourselves confronted
with a tapestry of at least 6 methodologies for what we have to designate as the
decipherments rather than the decipherment of Linear A. There is is simply no single
approach to its decipherment, even partial. But there is more to the picture than simply that.
Given that the vast majority (89.4 %) of Linear A exograms appear once only on all of the
extant Linear A tablets and fragments, it is to be expected that, at least for the time being and
until a considerable number of new Linear A tablets and fragments are hopefully unearthed in
the future, it is usually impossible to decipher terms occurring once and once only, unless
any one of these is Mycenaean-derived or a toponym/eponym or it falls inside the pre-Greek
substratum.

What then is possible? What with the methodologies and procedures we have adopted and
carried out, it is possible to decipher a significant cross-section, perhaps as much as 34 %, of
Linear A, with a margin of error = 30 % +/- 4 % = 26 – 34 %. The rest is beyond the pale.

Minoan Linear A grammar and syntax:

While we have yet to tackle the thorny problems confronting us at every turn in any attempt to
decipher the grammar and syntax of Linear A, all is far from hopeless. Preliminary incursions
into grammar and syntax have borne some fruit. For instance, we have been able to isolate a
few characteristics, both positive and negative. These are:
1. Linear A appears to be an agglutinative language, whereby syllabograms are strung together
to produce strings of words. The longer the strings of syllabograms, the greater the possibility
we are confronted with agglutination. In fact, we have isolated a few examples, such as
arokaku NM1 a1lloj xalku/ = highly burnished copper Cf. Linear B kako xalko/j;
kitanasija/kitanasijase NM1 kitanisija (gen. sing.) ki/rtanasia <- ki/rtanoj = terebinth tree
Cf. Linear B kitano ki/rtanoj; itisapuko MOSE OMNM1 i1tija = round + pu/coj = box-wood
-or- NMOM i1tija = round (NM) + puko = tripod (OM) = round tripod”. Although Prof. John
G. Younger has identified a few strings longer than 15 syllabograms, these are indecipherable.
2. The masculine singular of Linear A words appears to end either in u or o; the neuter
singular in o (if it exists). There are plenty of examples in the Lexicon above.
3. The feminine singular terminates with a, and where diminutive in a2=ai e.g. ereda2
(eredai), damaidumitatira2 (dumitatirai), karopa2(karopai), mepaja2 (mepajai),
midamara2 (midaramai) and tarejana2 (tarejanai), to cite but a few. Feminine plural
appears to terminate in e. For genders, see the many entries above in the Lexicon.
4. The feminine genitive singular ultimate appears to be ija, and there are plenty of examples
(for instance, jadireja, kiraja, kupa3rija, musajanemaruja, namarasasaja, nenaarasaja,
nemaruja, nenaarasaja, nukisikija, sejarapaja, sidija, sudaja and Sukirteija, to cite just a
few) . The problem is that no examples of masculine or neuter genitive singular with the
ultimate ijo exist. Only a few words terminate in iju, (aju, araju, kumaju, kureju, pirueju and
sareju), but these are almost certainly masculine and/or neuter genitive singular, hence
tending to validate the notion that the feminine genitive singular is ija.
5. dative + instrumental sing. If we are to believe that the terminations e or i are Minoan
dative singular, there appear to be a large number of terms in the dative singular in Minoan
Linear A. Examples are: arati NM1 a0ra=ti/ <- ara/toj = with something unblessed; dare NM1

51
da=lei/ <- da=lo/j = (with) a firebrand or torch/daro LIG NM1 da=lo/j = firebrand; and
qaqisenuti NM1 xalkei/a=senuti = with bronze craftsmanship. If indeed these are instances of
the dative or instrumental singular in Minoan, then it is conceivable that Mycenaean and
archaic Greek inherited this case.
6. The archaic accusative singular appears to terminate in a, just as we would expect, if
comparison with Linear B holds up.
7. The instrumental plural appears to terminate in si, se or sije. See the Lexicon for examples.
8. If 2.- 7. above hold water, then it is entirely possible, and even probable, that Mycenaean,
hence archaic Greek, inherited at least some declensions from the Minoan language.
9. On the other hand, we can find no convincing evidence for the conjugation of verbs. If this
proves to be the case, then verbal forms in Mycenaean and archaic Greek are in all probability
not inherited from Minoan.

Thus, the decipherment of Linear A is a much more complex matter than historical linguists,
among them Sam Connolly, C.J.K. Campbell-Dunn, Cyrus. H. Gordon, Stuart L. Harris,
Gretchen Leonhardt, Joseph Alexander MacGillivary and Pavel Serafimov with Anton Perdih,
attempting to decipher the Minoan language to date, could have ever have imagined. And this
is why they have all failed to decipher it.

Appendix 1

Out of a total of 774 intact words, only 109 or 14 % of intact Linear A words occur more than
once in John G. Younger’s Linear A Reverse Lexicon: KEY S=n indicates Subtotal=n

Please note that, as per my Lexicon, I refuse to deal with words with numeric syllabograms in
them, as these are indecipherable; with single syllabograms, as these are not words (you need
to read my work on supersyllabograms to understand this principle); with words truncated
left, right or in the middle; and with concatenated strings of > 15 syllabograms, since these are
almost certainly agglutinated words. I am very conservative in my selection of words. They
must be intact; otherwise, they are meaningless, at least to me. The fact that a very minimum
of 89.4 % of Linear A words occur only ONCE goes a very long way to explaining why it is so
damn hard to decipher Linear A. To find any Linear A word which occurs only once in
context, search for it on Prof. Younger’s site.

TWICE:
DE-RI-PA: X2 = HT 113.1; KH 98.1
DI-KA: X2 = ZA 4a.8; ZA 15b.1
DI-RU: X2 = HT 141.2; ZA Zb 34
DU-ZU X2 = HT 51b.2; HT 99b.1
E-DA-MI-SA X 2 = ZA 5a.3; ZA 15a.6-7
E-ZU-SI-QE X2 = ZA 4a.5; ZA 15a.2
I-DA X2 = KH 13.4; HT 12.6
JA-I X2 = Zf 1; KN Za 10a-b
JA-JA X 2= PK Za 18; SY Za 8
JA-RE-PU2 X2 =PK Za 16; ZA Zb 34 S=10
JA-SE-PA X2 = HT 93a.8; HT Wc 3001-3002

52
JU-RE-KU X 2 = HT 39.2; HT 117b.1
KI-TE X 2 = HT 13.3-4, HT 122a.3
KU-TI-TI X 2 = HT 35.1; ZA Zb 3.2
MA-NU-QA X 2 = HT 116a.6-7; KH 88.1-2
MI-NA-MI-NA-PI-I X 2= PK Za 10; PK Za 11.d
MI-NI-DU-WA X 2= HT 6b.1-2; HT 85b.4-5
NA-A X 2 = HT 37.5; HT 126a.2
NA-DI X 2 = KH 59.3; HT 3.1
NA-KA X2 = HT 23a.1; HT 123b.4 S=20
NA-NI-PA3 X2 = HT 6b.6; HT 93a.1
NA-RI-DI X 2 = HT 93a.1-2; HT 102.3
NE-A X2 = PK Za 12.c ; THE Zb 3
NE-A-KO-A X 2 = PK Za 11.b-c
NI-PA3 X2= HT 85a.2; HT 102.2
NI-ZU-KU X2 = HT 13.4; HT 85a.4
QE-NA-MI-KU X2 = HT 54a.2; HT Wc 3014a-b
QE-RA2-U X2 = HT 1.1-2 ; HT 95a.4-5, b.4-5
RA-A X2 = ARKH 1 a.2; KH 79+89.2
RA-KU X2 = ARKH 2.1-2; ZA 20.4 S=30
RA-PA X2 = HT 128a.1; PH 3a.3
RA2-PU X 2 = HT 28b.3-4; HT 116a.2
RE-DA-SI X 2= HT 17.3 ; HT 122a.5
RE-KU X 2= HT 39.3; HT 53b.4
RI-PA-TU X 2= HT 79+83.2
RO-DA-KI X 2= HT 47a.4, HT 117a.9
RO-KU-TO-PO X 2 = HT 122b.6; HT 131b.4
RU-DE-DI X 2 = HT 86a.3; HT 95a.4, b.4
RU-KA X 2 = HT 75.1; HT 97a.1
RU-MU X 2 = HT 3.4; HT 46a.1 = 40
RU-QA X 2 = HT 104.3, HT111a.2
SA-PI X2= KH 6.6; HT 123b.2
SA-QA X2 = HT 70.2; HT 111a.2
SE-KI-DI X2 = HT 87.3; HT 117b.2
SE-PA X2 = HT 18.1; HT 27b.5
SI-KA X2 = HT Wa 1027a+g ; HT Wa 1028a+g
SI-NA-MI-U X2= HT 28b.1-2; HT 117a.1-2
TA-I-KA-MA X2 = PK 1.8; ZA 5b.2-3
TA-MA-RUX X2 = HT 29.1 ; HT 99b.2-3
TA-NI-RI-A X2 = HT 25a.3; ZA 8.2-3 = 50
TA-PI-I-DA X2 = ZA 8.5; ZA 10a.4-5
TA-SA X2 = HT 42.1 ; HT 117a.7
TA2-RE-KI X2 = HT 85b.1-2; HT 129.1
TA2-RI-KI X2 = HT 114a.1; HT 121.1
TE-JU-DA X2 = HT 34.1; HT Wa 1031
TE-MA-DA-I X2 = AR Zf 1; AR Zf 2
TE-RI-KA-MA X2 = HT 87.1-2; HT 117a.1-2
TI-NU X2 = HT 84.2; ZA 9.1

53
TI-QE X2 = HT 7a.1; HT 126b.3
TI-TA X2 = HT 26a.2; HT 97a.5 = 60
TO-I-PA X2 = HT 97a.3; HT 120.6
TU-MI X2 = HT 117a.2; HT 135a.2
TU-NA-PA3-KU X2 = HT 47a.1-2; HT 119.3
TU-SI X2 = HT Wa 1019g; ZA 20.3
ZA-ME X2 = HT 10a.4, HT 85b.3 = 65

3 times:
DE-PA: X3 = HT 9a.2, 9b.2; HT 122a.5
JA-A X3 = KH 97a.1; PE Zc 4; SY Za 2d
KI-PI-SI X 3 =ZA 4a.6-7; ZA 5b.2; ZA 15a.5
MA-A X3 = HS Zg 1; MA 1b.1; ZA 7b.1
ME-DA X 3= HT 86a.4; HT 95a.2, b.2; HT 120.2
ME-RA-SA-SA-A X 3= O Zb 10; PK Za 11.b-c; PR Za 1.c
NE-TA-PA X3 = HT 94b.1 ; HT 122a.6 ; HT We 1019a
PA-KU-KA X3 = HT 16.1-2; HT Wc 3015a; HT Wc 3016a
RA-QE-DA X3 = HT 6a.6; HT 57a.1; HT 120.1
RE-MA-NU-IB X 3 = ZA 4a.5-6; ZA 5b.1; ZA 15a.4-5 S=10
RI-A X 3 = HT 141.1; PH 6.1, 6.3 (and 6.4?)
RI-TE X 3 = ARKH 6.2; HT 91.5; PH(?) 31b.3
RO-SA X 3 = HT 9a.1; HT 17.2, HT 19.2, HT 42.2
RU-A X 3 = HT 9a.5-6, 9b.2-3; HT 49a.6
RU-KA-A X 3 = HT 2.1; HT 86a.1; HT 86b.1
RU-QA-QA X 3 = HT 93a.4-5; HT 118.2-3; HT 122b.3-4
SA-JA X3 = MA Zb 8; PH 16b.1; PK Za 8.b
SE-ZA-RE-DU X3 = ZA 10a.5, 10b.1-2; ZA 20.1-2
SU-NI-KU X3 = HT 10a.1; HT 86a.1-2, b.1-2; HT 95a.3-4, b.3-4
TE-NU-MI X3 = HT 86a.5; HT 95a.2, b.2-3 ; HT 106.1 S=20
TI-I X3 = HT 25b.2; HT 62+73.3; IO Za 12
TI-NA-TA X3 = HT 7a.4; HT 49a.2; HT 10b.4; HT 98a.2
TU-TE X3 = HT 7a.5; HT 13.3; HT 85b.2
ZA-RE X3 = KH 86.1; HT 13.2; HT 88.1-2 S=24

4 times:
DA-RI-DA: X4= HT 10a.4; HT 85a.2; HT 93a.7; HT 122a.7
DI-JE: X4 = HT 8a.1; HT 36.1; HT 140.1-2; HT 122b.1
MA-SA X4 = HT 6b.5-6; HT 10a.1; HT 52a.1; ZA 10b.3-4
NA-TA-RE-KI X 4 = HT 2.3; HT 8a.5; HT 108.1; HT 120.4-5
PA-KU X4 = HT 110a.2; HT We 1020a; KH 29.2; ZA 11a.5, b.3
RE-JA-PA X 4 = HT 8b.4; HT 29.2; HT 88.5 ; ZA 10b.5-6
RU-SA X 4 = HT 86a.2, b.2; HT 94b.3 ; HT 95a.3, b.1 ; HT 123a.4-5
SE-A X4 = HT 81.1; HT 93a.2-3; HT 132.1; ZA Zb 3.1
U-NA-DI X 4 = HT 16.1-2; HT 9a.3, 9b.5; HT 25a.2-3; KN Zb 27 S=9

5 times:
MA-NA-PI-I X5= AP Za 2.1; IO Za 2.1; IO Za 15; KO Za 1c-d; VRY Za 1a-b

54
RE-DA X 5 = HT 7a.4-5; HT 10a.2, 10b.1; HT 85a.5; HT 122b.4
RU+JA+MI X 5 = HT 23a.2, b.2; HT 32.2; HT 35.2; Ht 81.1; HT 60.1?
SI-NA-KA-NA-U X5 = IO Za 9; KO Za 1c; PK Za 8.b; SY Za 2b; TL Za 1b S=4

6 times:
PA-KA X6 = HT 6a.1; HT 8b.4; HT 94a.1; HT 102.1; HT 105.1; HT 140.5

7 times:
DA-I: X7 = IO Za 2.2; PK Za 17; PK Za 18; NE Za 1; ZA 21b.1; ZA 24a.1
DI-MA: X7 = HT 3.1; HT 3.7; HT 69.2; HT 85b.5; HT 97a.4; HT 118.1; PH(?) 31a.2
NU-PA3-KU X7 = HT 1.3-4; HT 3.6; HT 49a.6-7; HT 88.5; HT 117a.3; HT 122a.6 & 7; PH(?)
31a.3
TE-RU-SI X 7 = IO Za 2.2; IO Za 14; IO Za 15; KO Za 1c-d ; PK Za 11.d TL Za 1c; SY Za 3; VRY
Za 1a-b S=3

8 times:
ME-RA-SA-SA-JA X 8 = IO Za 2.1; IO Za 6; IO Za 9; IO Za 12; IO Za 16; PL Zf 1; PS Za 2.2; TL
Za 1b

10 times:
DU-A X10 = HT 85a.1; HT 86a.4; HT 88.1; HT 92.1-2; HT 95b.1; HT 99a.1; HT 133.1-2; KH
23.1; TY 3a.3; ZA Wc.a1-2

11 times:
RO-KI X 11= HT 15.4; HT 30.4; HT 34.6; HT 37.5; HT 55a.1; HT 88.4; HT 93b.1; HT 94b.1;
HT 117a.1-2; HT 123a.1-2, a.7-9, b.6

18 times:
RA2-SA X 18 = HT 18.2; HT 28a.3, b.2; HT 30.1; HT 32.1; HT 33.1; HT 34.1-2; HT 90.1-2 ; HT
93a.4; HT 94a.3 ; HT 99a.1 ; HT 100.4 ; HT 101.3 ; HT 102.1-2 ; HT 105.3 ; HT 114a.1-2 ; HT
121.2 ; HT 125a.4 ; HT 130.2

30 times:
RO-KU X 30 = HT 9a.6; HT 9b.6; HT 11a.3, 11b.5-6; HT 13.7; HT 25b.2, b.4; HT 27a.7; HT
39.5; HT 40.3; HT 46a.2; HT 67.2; HT 74.2; HT 85a.5; HT 88.6 ; HT 89.4; HT 94a.3 , b.4 ; HT
100.3 ; HT 102.5; HT 104.5; HT 109.3; HT 110a.3; HT 116b.1; HT 117a.6 ; HT 118.5 ; HT 119.5 ;
HT 122a.8, b.5 HT 123a.7-9, b.6; HT 127b.4, b.7; HT 130.4; PH(?) 31a.4; ZA 15b.2

TOTAL SUBS: = 109

TOTAL = 109/774 INTACT WORDS ONLY = 14.1 % of 774 from Younger,
OR
109/1030= 10.7 % of my own total of 1020.

TOTAL no. of Linear A words occurring only once, in Younger = 774-109 = 665 or 85.9 % !
& in my Lexicon = 1030-109 = 921 or 89.4 % !

with my compliments to Alexandre Solcà of the Université de Genève

55
 Appendix 2

Common pulse crops in the late Neolithic, Early, Middle and Late Bronze Ages Mediterranean
and Near East, including Minoan Crete include:

Lentils Lens culinaris *

As far back as 8,500 to 6,000 BCE,, lentils were domesticated in the Fertile Crescent, where
archaeological evidence confirms the existence of lentils.

Faba beans Vicia Faba fa/ba *

Faba (fava) beans are among the world’s most ancient crops. During the Neolithic and Bronze
Ages, along with other pulses, they played an important role in spreading agriculture
throughout North Africa, where they can be found in numerous archaeological deposits.

Peas Pisum sativum

Peas are also belong one of the oldest domesticated crops. Archaeological evidence dates them
existence back to 10,000 BCE to the Near East. During the Bronze Age peas spread to Europe
and the Mediterranean.

Chick peas Cicer arietinum *

Chick peas, first domesticated ca. 7,000 BCE, originated in an area located between the
southeast of Turkey and the western part of the Fertile Crescent.

Cow peas Vigna unguiculata

While wild varieties of cow peas have been traced to southern Africa, domesticated cow peas
originated in Sub Saharan Africa. Today cow peas are cultivated throughout the world. They
remain an important component of traditional inter-cropping systems in the dry savannahs of
Sub-Saharan Africa thanks to their high shade tolerance.

Lupin(e)s Lupinus *

Lupinus is regarded as one of the most diverse genus in the legumes family for its very high
protein content, as much as 45% and its versatility, ranging from human nutrition to livestock
forage. White Lupine was domesticated by ancient civilizations in the Mediterranean and
Near East, as elsewhere.

In his thesis, The Role of the Traditional Mediterranean Diet in the Development of Minoan
Crete (thesis_hum_1997_riley_frank_richard.pdf), Richard Frank Riley provides us with an
extremely detailed analysis of grain and pulse crops vetch, bitter vetch, lentils, chick peas,
peas and grass peas, all cultivated in Minoan Crete. Celtic beans are all mentioned, with a

56
great deal of information on how they were grown and how they were fully incorporated into
the Minoan diet.

Since we have already deciphered, in some cases, with complete accuracy, the types of grain
crops the Minoans grew, i.e. kunisu for emmer wheat and dideru for einkorn wheat, plus
sara2 (sarai) for flax, among others, with the information on the most common Bronze Age
pulse crops we now have in hand, we may now draw the tentative conclusion that any one of
the following words, in order of frequency of use on the tablets, are very likely pulse crops:

1. minute 20 10 10 6+ = 46+
2. pura2 (purai) 6 (with figs) 40 (with grains) (Haghia Triada only) 46
3. qanuma 20
all on tablets from Haghia Triada only.

The crops they represent, permuted, could be any of the following, with the most likely
candidates marked by an asterisk (*): broad beans (faba/fava) *, chick peas *, lentils *, lupins
* and vetch *. 2 of the 5 pules mentioned in English are the right ones. But we cannot know
which two. The the following pulses also possible, but less likely, candidates: bambara, cow
peas, green peas, pigeon peas.

References & Notes:

[1] Younger, John G. Linear A Reverse Lexicon:
http://www.people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/lexicon_reverse.html
[2] Renfrew, Colin. Prehistory: the Making of the Human Mind. London: Folio Society. ©
2013. xxiii, 240 pp.
[3] Smithsonian.com. This 3,500-Year-Old Greek Tomb Upended What We Thought We
Knew About the Roots of Western Civilization
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/golden-warrior-greek-tomb-exposes-roots-
western-civilization-180961441/
[4] Op Cit. The fifth and final stage ... passim ... is the ‘theoretic’ stage, which is characterised
by ... passim ... ‘institutionalised paradigmatic thought’ ― i.e. by the development of the kind
of theory that gives the stage its name ― and by massive external memory storage. This
normally involves writing. [It] ... contrasts the internal memory record (or ‘engram’ ) ―
implying the storage of memory within our brains, which had to serve all humans until the
development of writing systems ― with the external memory record (or ‘exogram’ ) as implied
by written archives ... (pg. 106)
[5] For pre-Greek substratum toponyms, see the examples.
[6] An agglutinative language is one in which words (exograms) or morphemes are strung
together in a continuous sequence, in which every grammatical category is marked by a
separate suffix of its own. Morphemes in agglutinative languages can be segmented.
Languages in this class include Basque, Japanese, Swahili, Burmese and apparently Old
Minoan. For instance, in Old Minoan, any of the following, among many others, may or may
not be agglutinations: du-mita-tira2 (du-mi-tarai), ike-sede-sute, mera-sa-saja, naisi-zami-
kao, rasa-saja and temi-rera-wi ― although we cannot possibly know where the
demarcations between agglutinated words (–) fall. (all italics mine)
[7] See Bibliography 68, Smithsonian.

57
[8] See [2] above.
[9] See online, Minoan Crete Bronze Age civilisation: Juktas Peak Sanctuary
http://www.minoancrete.com/juktas.htm
The translation “peak/summit” appears to be validated by the fact that this crystal rock bowl
was found co-incidentally in the Juktas (Iouktas) Peak Sanctuary. If as my decipherment
suggests, the bowl mentions a sacred place, then we have evidence that it (the bowl) is an
official bowl for the peak sanctuary, and in all probability a libation bowl, especially in view of
the fact that there are two words referring to libation in Linear A, rani and ratise (See Lexicon
above).

Bibliography:

1. Adu, Michael. Stay green in wheat: Comparative study of modern bread wheat and ancient
wheat cultivars
https://www.academia.edu/32352362/Stay_green_in_wheat_Comparative_study_of_mode
rn_bread_wheat_and_ancient_wheat_cultivars
2. Alexiou, Stylianos and Brice, William C. 1976. “A silver pin from Platanos with an
inscription in Linear A: Her. Mus. 498”, KADM 15:18–27
3. ANCIENTSCRIPTS.COM. Linear A
http://www.ancientscripts.com/lineara.html
4. Beneš, Jaromír. Kernel Weights of Triticum, Hordeum, Avena, Secale and Panicum Species
can be used for Better Estimation of Importance of Different Cereal Species in
Archaeobotanical Assemblages
https://www.academia.edu/31109189/Kernel_Weights_of_Triticum_Hordeum_Avena_Seca
le_and_Panicum_Species_can_be_used_for_Better_Estimation_of_Importance_of_Differe

58
nt_Cereal_Species_in_Archaeobotanical_Assemblages
5. Bennett E. L. 1950. “Fractional Quantities in Minoan Book-keeping”, AJA 54: 204–222.
6. Ibid. 1980 Linear A Fractional Retractation, KADM 19: 12–23.
7. Billigmeier J. C. 1973 “Linear A fractions: a new approach”, AJA 77: 61–65.
8. Brice, W. C. 1961 Inscriptions in the Minoan Linear Script of Class A. Oxford: 1961.
9. Ibid. 1967. “The structure of Linear A, with some Proto-Elamite and Proto-Indic
comparisons”, Europa: 33-34.
10. Cash R. and Cash E. 2011. ”“La tablette HT 123: une comptabilite en lineaire A: Objet de la
tablette, consequences sur les valeurs des fractions et la signification du terme 67-02: Le
corpus connu des textes disponibles en lineaire A”, KADM 50: 2-30.
11. Croft, Paul. Neolithic Dispersals from the Levantine Corridor: a Mediterranean Perspective
https://www.academia.edu/32898481/Neolithic_Dispersals_from_the_Levantine_Corridor
_a_Mediterranean_Perspective
12. Davis, Brent. Minoan Stone Vessels with Linear A Inscriptions. AEGAEUM, 36. Leuven;
Liège: Peeters, 2014. ISBN 9789042930971 xxiv, 421 pp.
13. Del Freo, Maurizio and Zurbach, Julien. 2011 “La preparation d’un supplement au Recueil
des inscriptions en lineaire A de L. Godart et J.-P. Olivier = The preparation of a supplement
to the Recueil des inscriptions en lineaire A. Observations on work in progress. The work on a
supplement to the Recueil des inscriptions en lineaire A”, BCH 135, 1: 73-97.
14. Desheva, Gergana. Comparative Evaluation of Einkorn Accessions (Triticum monococcum
L.) of Some Main Agricultural Characters
https://www.academia.edu/33523050/Comparative_Evaluation_of_Einkorn_Accessions_Tr
iticum_monococcum_L._of_Some_Main_Agricultural_Characters
15. Duhoux, Yves. Deciphering Bronze Age Scripts of Crete The Case of Linear A
https://www.academia.edu/30958555/Deciphering_Bronze_Age_Scripts_of_Crete_The_Ca
se_of_Linear_A
16. Ibid. 1989 “Le lineaire A: problemes de dechiffrement”, in Duhoux, Yves, Palaima, Thomas
G. And Bennet, John (eds.). Problems in Decipherment. Louvain-la-Neuve. pp. 59–119.
17. Facchetti G. M. 1994 “Linear A Metrograms”, KADM 33, 1994: 142–148.
18. Faure, Paul. 1995 “Le caractere hellenique de la langue des Minoens”, Actes du 7e congrès
d’Études crétoises. Rethymnon.
19. Finkelberg, M. 2001 “The language of Linear A: Greek, Semitic or Anatolian?”, in Drews,
R., ed. Greater Anatolia and Indo-European Language Family. Papers presented at a
Colloquium Hosted by the University of Richmond, March 18-19, 2000, JES. Monograph
Series 38. Washington. pp. 81- 105.
20. Ibid. 1991 “Minoan inscriptions on libation vessels”, MIN 25-26: 43-85.
21. Gell-Mann, Murray, et al. Distant Language Relationship: The Current Perspective
http://www.jolr.ru/files/(3)jlr2009-1(13-30).pdf
22. Godart, Louis and Olivier, Jean-Pierre. 1976-1985. Recueil des inscriptions en Lineaire A,
ET 21. vols. 1–5. Paris.
23. Gordon, Cyrus H. Linguistic continuity from Minoan to Eteocretan
http://smea.isma.cnr.it/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Gordon_Linguistic-Continuity-from-
Minoan.pdf
24. Grant, Anthony. On using qualitative lexicostatistics to illuminate language history
https://www.academia.edu/10640946/On_using_qualitative_lexicostatistics_to_illuminate
_language_history
25. Hammond, N.G.L. A History of Greece to 322 B.C. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Third

59
Edition. ISBN 0-19-873095-0 © 1986. xxi, 691 pp.
26. Harris, Kerry. Beyond the wild, the feral, and the domestic Lessons from prehistoric Crete
https://www.academia.edu/32448285/Beyond_the_wild_the_feral_and_the_domestic_Les
sons_from_prehistoric_Crete
27. Ibid. Hunting performance and incorporation: human-deer encounter in Late Bronze Age
Crete
https://www.academia.edu/32448261/Hunting_performance_and_incorporation_human-
deer_encounter_in_Late_Bronze_Age_Crete
28. Harris, Stuart L. N.D. Linear A Decipherment: Translation of Minoan Inscriptions in
Linear A. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. 226 pp.
29. Hejcman, Michal, et al. “Kernel Weights of Triticum, Hordeum, Avena, Secale and
Panicum Species can be used for Better Estimation of Importance of Different Cereal Species
in Archaeobotanical Assemblages”, Interdisciplinaria archaeologica/Natural Sciences in
Archaeology. Vol VII, no. 2, 2016. pp. 189-196
30. Hodder, Ian. “Human-thing entanglement: towards an integrated archaeological
perspective”, JRAI (Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute), 17, 2011. pp. 154-177
31. Hooker, James Thomas. 1997 Kritika daidalika. Evidence for the Minoan language.
Selected essays in memory of James Hooker on the archaeology, epigraphy and philology of
Minoan and Mycenaean Crete. Owens, Gareth. ed. Hakkert: Amsterdam.
32. Janke, Richard Vallance. Can quantum computers assist us in deciphering Minoan
Linear A?
https://www.academia.edu/31649913/Can_quantum_computers_assist_us_in_deciphering
_Minoan_Linear_A.pdf
33. Ibid. “The Decipherment of Supersyllabograms in Linear B”, Archaeology and Science
(Belgrade). ISSN 1452-7448 Vol. 11 (2015), pp. 73-108
https://www.academia.edu/31400400/Archaeology_and_Science_Vol._11_The_Decipherm
ent_of_Supersyllabograms_in_Linear_B.pdf
34. Kenanidis, Ioannis K. A 17th. c. BC Minoan Votive Double Axe (Labrys) the Arkalochori
Axe and its siblings, in Anistoriton. Vol. 15 (2016-2017). pp. 1-20
35. Koh, A.J. And Betancourt, P.P. “WINE AND OLIVE OIL FROM AN EARLY MINOAN I
HILLTOP FORT”, Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry. Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 15‐23
36. Krauss, Reiko. The rapid spread of early farming from the Aegean into the Balkans via the
Sub-Mediterranean-Aegean Vegetation Zone
https://www.academia.edu/31731571/The_rapid_spread_of_early_farming_from_the_Aege
an_into_the_Balkans_via_the_Sub-Mediterranean-Aegean_Vegetation_Zone
37. Krzyszkowska, Olga. Cutting to the chase: hunting in Minoan Crete. PHYSIS. Aegeaeum 37
https://www.academia.edu/31847148/Cutting_to_the_chase_hunting_in_Minoan_Crete._P
HYSIS._Aegeaeum_37
38. Kvashilava, Gia. “On Reading and Identifying the Vessel Name KA-DI on Linear A Tablets
ZA 4 and ZA 15”, Kartvelology. ISSN 1512-4975. 2014, no. 13. 45 pp.
39. La Marle, Hubert. 2010 Reading Linear A: Script, Morphology and Glossary of the
Minoan Language. Guethner. 156 pp.
40. Lewyckyj, Oksana. LINEAR A: Presentation made by Oksana Lewyckyj (HORI12BA) For
LANGL1810 : English for Arts students Linear_A_O_Lewyckyj.pdf
41. Luján, Eugenio R. 2010 “Semantic Maps and Word Formation: Agents, Instruments, and
Related Semantic Roles”, Linguistic Discovery. Vol 8, no. 1 2010, pp. 162-175
42. Ibid. “La moción de género en los adjetivos temáticos en micénico”, Faventia Supplementa

60
I: Actas del Simposio Internacional: 55 Años de Micenología (1952-2007), pp. 127-153
43. Ibid. Los temas en -s en micénico
https://www.academia.edu/31035645/Los_temas_en_-s_en_mic%C3%A9nico
44. Marinis, Raffaele C. de. “Un elmo a calotta composta della tarda età del Bronzo”, Notizie
Archeologiche Bergomensi, Vol. 24, 2016, pp. 69-93 ISSN 1127-2155
45. McGillivray, J. “Minoan mantras. The quiet decipherment of Linear A”
https://www.academia.edu/303303/Minoan_mantras._The_quiet_decipherment_of_Linea
r_A
46. Melena, José L. R. J. Firth — JLM, “The Secondary Scribes of Knossos”, Minos 39, 2016,
pp. 353-378
https://www.academia.edu/33143542/R._J._Firth_JLM_The_Secondary_Scribes_of_Knos
sos_Minos_39_2016_pp._353-378
47. Militello P. 2011 “Some Eccentric Linear A Tablets from Ayia Triada”, in H. Oniz – P.
Militello (eds.). SOMA 2011. Proceedings of the 15th Symposium on Mediterranean
Archaeology Catania, March 3rd –4th. Oxford.
48. Montecchi B. 2010 “A Classification Proposal of Linear A Tablets from Haghia Triada in
Classes and Series”, KADM 49: 11–38.
49. Montecchi B. 2008 “Note d’analisi testuale delle tavolette in lineare A di Haghia Triada”,
ASAtene, 86: 313–336.
50. Monti O. 2002 “Observations sur la langue du lineaire A, KADM 41: 117–120.
51. Ibid. 2011 Ku-ro, ki-ro et l’administration de Haghia Triada, KADM 50: 15–31.
52. Mosenkis, Yuriy. Fates of Cretan slaves in the Linear A tablet HT 7
https://www.academia.edu/12175506/Fates_of_Cretan_slaves_in_the_Linear_A_tablet_H
T_7
53. Ibid. FLOURISHING OF THE MINOAN GREEK STATE IN THE LINEAR A SCRIPT
1700-1450 BCE
https://www.academia.edu/28708342/FLOURISHING_OF_THE_MINOAN_GREEK_STAT
E_IN_THE_LINEAR_A_SCRIPT_1700_1450_BCE
54. Ibid. Greek grammar in Linear A
https://www.academia.edu/32103118/Greek_grammar_in_Linear_A
55. Ibid. Indo-European Greek Morphology in Linear A
https://www.academia.edu/12133867/Indo-European_Greek_morphology_in_Linear_A
56. Ibid. GREEK WRITTEN LANGUAGE FROM 3000 BC
https://www.academia.edu/32123346/Chapter_Two._GREEK_WRITTEN_LANGUAGE_FROM
_3000_BC
57. Ibid. ‘MINOAN GREEK’ DIALECT: MORPHOLOGY
https://www.academia.edu/28433292/MINOAN_GREEK_DIALECT_MORPHOLOGY
58. Ibid. MINOAN GREEK FARMING IN LINEAR A
https://www.academia.edu/27669709/MINOAN_GREEK_FARMING_IN_LINEAR_A_Iurii
_Mosenkis
59. Ibid. Greek names of sum and debt in Linear A
https://www.academia.edu/12133911/Greek_names_of_sum_and_debt_in_Linear_A
60. Ibid. Researchers of Greek in Linear A
https://www.academia.edu/31443689/Researchers_of_Greek_Linear_A
61. Ibid. Trojan Greek inscriptions: Troy III 2150 BC and later
https://www.academia.edu/31434046/Trojan_Greek_inscriptions_Troy_III_2150_BC_and
_later

61
62. Mueller-Bieniek, Aldona. Plant macrofossils from the site of Tell Arbid, Northeast Syria
(3rd–2nd millennium BC). Preliminary report
https://www.academia.edu/31923542/Plant_macrofossils_from_the_site_of_Tell_Arbid_N
ortheast_Syria_3rd_2nd_millennium_BC_._Preliminary_report
63. Nagy, Gregory. Greek-Like Elements in Linear A. Harvard University. 1963. 31 pp.
http://grbs.library.duke.edu/article/viewFile/11991/4031[n]
64. Olivier J.-P. 1975 “‘Lire’ le lineaire A?”, in C. Preaux, J., Bingen, G., Cambier, &
Nachtergael G. (eds.). Le monde grec. Hommages à Claire Préaux. Bruxelles, pp. 441–449.
65. Palmer, L.R. The Interpretation of Mycenaean Greek Texts. Oxford: Oxford at the
Clarendon Press. © 1963, 1998. ISBN 0-19-813144-5. ix., 488 pp.
66. Ibid. 1958 Luwian and Linear A, Transactions of the Philosophical Society.
67. Ibid. Linear A and the Anatolian Languages, in Atti e memorie del 1° Congresso
internazionale di micenologia (Roma 27 settembre – 3 ottobre 1967). Roma. Vol. 1, pp. 339–
354.
68. Palmer, Ruth. Linear A Commodities: a Comparison of Resources. Linear A commodities
Palmer.pdf pp. 133-155
69. Perna M. 1998 “Gli ideogrammi dei vasi in Lineare A”, BCH 122: 428–431.
70. Ibid. “Ideograms of Vases and Fractions in Linear A Script”, in Foster, K.P. & Lafineur, R.
(eds.), Metron. Measuring the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 9 th. International
Conference. New Haven, Yale University, 18–21 April 2002., Liege-Austin. pp. 343–347, pl.
LXVIII.
71. Poupet, Pierre. Approche pédoarchéologique des espaces de production agricole à l’âge du
Bronze dans les montagnes méditerranéennes (exemples des Pyrénées-Orientales et de la
Haute-Corse, France)
https://www.academia.edu/32748459/Approche_p%C3%A9doarch
%C3%A9ologique_des_espaces_de_production_agricole_%C3%A0_l_
%C3%A2ge_du_Bronze_dans_les_montagnes_m%C3%A9diterran
%C3%A9ennes_exemples_des_Pyr%C3%A9n%C3%A9es-Orientales_et_de_la_Haute-
Corse_France_
72. Rendsburg, Gary A. “Someone Will Succeed in Deciphering Minoan”, Biblical
Archaeologist. Vol. 59, no. 1. 1996
http://jewishstudies.rutgers.edu/docman/rendsburg/90-someone-will-succeed-in-
deciphering-minoan-cyrus-h-gordon-and-minoan-linear-a/file
73. Renfrew, Colin. Arqueología y lenguas: hacia nuevos horizontes
https://www.academia.edu/31722528/Arqueolog
%C3%ADa_y_lenguas_hacia_nuevos_horizontes
74. Ibid. J. Hilditch. 2015. The Ceramic Fabrics of the Special Deposit South, Kavos, Keros
https://www.academia.edu/22805092/J._Hilditch._2015._The_Ceramic_Fabrics_of_the_S
pecial_Deposit_South_Kavos_Keros
75. Ibid. Ὁρίζων,Horizon A Colloquium in the Prehistory of the Cyclades (Cambridge 25-
28Μαρτίου 2004) by Neil Brodie, Jenny Doole, Giorgos Gavalas and Colin Renfrew (eds.),
ΜcDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge 2008.
https://www.academia.edu/6393493/%E1%BD%89%CF%81%CE%AF%CE%B6%CF%89%CE
%BD_Horizon_A_Colloquium_in_the_Prehistory_of_the_Cyclades_Cambridge_25-28%CE
%9C%CE%B1%CF%81%CF%84%CE%AF%CE%BF%CF
%85_2004_by_Neil_Brodie_Jenny_Doole_Giorgos_Gavalas_and_Colin_Renfrew_eds._
%CE%9CcDonald_Institute_Monographs_Cambridge_2008

62
76. Ibid. The Identity of Europe in Prehistoric Archaeology
https://www.academia.edu/31722522/The_Identity_of_Europe_in_Prehistoric_Archaeolog
y
77. Ibid., et al., eds. Kavos and the Special Deposits: The sancutary on Keros and the origins
of Aegean ritual practice: the excavations of 2006-2008. McDonald Institute for
Archaeological Research, © 2015. ISBN: 978-1-902937-70-0 ISSN: 1363-1349 (McDonald
Institute Monographs)
78. Ibid. Keros, Dhaskalio Kavos the investigations of 1987–88 Κέρος, Κάβος Δασκαλιο ῦ
Edited by Colin Renfrew, Christos Doumas, Lila Marangou & Giorgos Gavalas
https://www.academia.edu/11998248/Keros_Dhaskalio_Kavos_the_investigations_of_1987
_88_%CE%9A%CE%AD%CF%81%CE%BF%CF%82_%CE%9A%CE%AC%CE%B2%CE%BF
%CF%82_%CE%94%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%BA%CE%B1%CE%BB%CE%B9%CE%BF
%E1%BF
%A6_Edited_by_Colin_Renfrew_Christos_Doumas_Lila_Marangou_and_Giorgos_Gavalas
79. Ibid. “Models of Change in Language and Archaeology”, Transactions of the Philological
Society, Vol. 87, no. 2, 1989, pp. 103-155
80. Ibid. “The Origins of Indo-European Languages”, Scientific American, October, 1989, pp.
106-114
81. Ibid. Prehistory: the Making of the Human Mind. London: Folio Society. © 2013. xxiii,
240 pp.
82. Ibid. The settlement at Dhaskalio The sanctuary on Keros and the origins of Aegean ritual
practice : the excavations of 2006 - 2008, vol. I, C. Renfrew-Ο. Philaniotou- Nei Brodie
-Giorgos Gavalas and Michael Boyd (editors) McDonald Institute Monograph Series,
Cambridge 2013
https://www.academia.edu/6393572/The_settlement_at_Dhaskalio_The_sanctuary_on_Ke
ros_and_the_origins_of_Aegean_ritual_practice_the_excavations_of_2006_-
_2008_vol._I_C._Renfrew-%CE%9F._Philaniotou-_Nei_Brodie_-
Giorgos_Gavalas_and_Michael_Boyd_editors_McDonald_Institute_Monograph_Series_Ca
mbridge_2013
83. World Linguistic Diversity
https://www.academia.edu/31722548/World_Linguistic_Diversity
84. Riunione Scientifica IIPP 2017. NAB 24 de Marinis un nuovo tipo di elmo della tarda etàa
del Bronzo
https://www.academia.edu/33227882/NAB_24_de_Marinis_un_nuovo_tipo_di_elmo_dell
a_tarda_et%C3%A0a_del_Bronzo
85. Salamini, F., et al. AFLP Analysis of a Collection of Tetraploid Wheats Indicates the Origin
of Emmer and Hard Wheat Domestication in Southeast Turkey
https://www.academia.edu/33035148/AFLP_Analysis_of_a_Collection_of_Tetraploid_Whe
ats_Indicates_the_Origin_of_Emmer_and_Hard_Wheat_Domestication_in_Southeast_Tu
rkey
86. Ibid. Genetics and geography of wild cereal domestication in the near east
https://www.academia.edu/33035139/Genetics_and_geography_of_wild_cereal_domestica
tion_in_the_near_east
87. Ibid. Molecular Diversity at 18 Loci in 321 Wild and 92 Domesticate Lines Reveal No
Reduction of Nucleotide Diversity during Triticum monococcum (Einkorn) Domestication:
Implications for the Origin of Agriculture
https://www.academia.edu/33035113/Molecular_Diversity_at_18_Loci_in_321_Wild_and_

63
92_Domesticate_Lines_Reveal_No_Reduction_of_Nucleotide_Diversity_during_Triticum_
monococcum_Einkorn_Domestication_Implications_for_the_Origin_of_Agriculture
88. Shaaf, S. Evolutionary History of Wild Barley (Hordeum vulgare subsp. spontaneum)
Analyzed Using Multilocus Sequence Data and Paleodistribution Modeling
https://www.academia.edu/32892906/Evolutionary_History_of_Wild_Barley_Hordeum_v
ulgare_subsp._spontaneum_Analyzed_Using_Multilocus_Sequence_Data_and_Paleodistrib
ution_Modeling
89. Smithsonian.com. This 3,500-Year-Old Greek Tomb Upended What We Thought We
Knew About the Roots of Western Civilization
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/golden-warrior-greek-tomb-exposes-roots-
western-civilization-180961441/
90. Stein, Gil. Isotope evidence for agricultural extensification reveals how the world’s first
cities were fed
https://www.academia.edu/33353345/Isotope_evidence_for_agricultural_extensification_r
eveals_how_the_worlds_first_cities_were_fed
91. ThoughtCo. Linear A ― Undeciphered Writing System of the Minoans
https://www.thoughtco.com/linear-writing-system-of-the-minoans-171553
92. Ulanowksa, Agata. Different skills for different fibres? The use of flax and wool in textile
technology of Bronze Age Greece in light of archaeological experiments. Workshop: The
Competition of fibres, March 8-10, Excellence Cluster TOPOI (A-4), Textile Revolution
https://www.academia.edu/31717946/Different_skills_for_different_fibres_The_use_of_fla
x_and_wool_in_textile_technology_of_Bronze_Age_Greece_in_light_of_archaeological_ex
periments._Workshop_The_Competition_of_fibres_March_8-
10_Excellence_Cluster_TOPOI_A-4_Textile_Revolution_Freie_Universit
%C3%A4t_Berlin_program_download_
93. Valério, Miguel. 2007 “Diktaian Master: a Minoan Predecessor of Diktaian Zeus in Linear
A?”, KADM 46, S.: 3-14.
94. Vandenabeele F. 1974 “Les ideogrammes de vases sur les tablettes en lineaire A de Haghia
Triada et Phaistos”, BCH 98: 5–21.
95. Waandeers, Frederik. M.J. Studies in Local Case Relations in Mycenaean Greek.
Amsterdam: G.C. Grieben, © 1997. ISBN 90-5063-107-X. Vi,, 134 pp.
96. Wang, Tingting. Tianshanbeilu and the Isotopic Millet Road: Reviewing the late
Neolithic/Bronze Age radiation of human millet consumption from north China to Europe
https://www.academia.edu/31745651/Tianshanbeilu_and_the_Isotopic_Millet_Road_Revie
wing_the_late_Neolithic_Bronze_Age_radiation_of_human_millet_consumption_from_no
rth_China_to_Europe
97. Was D. A. 1971 ”Numerical fractions in the Minoan linear script A”, KADM 10: 35–51.
98. Ibid. HT 123, ”Linear A tax accounts”, KADM 20: 93–103.
99. Wikipedia: Linear A
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_A
100. Weisskopf, Alison & Deng, Zhenhua. From Early Domesticated Rice of the Middle
Yangtze Basin to Millet, Rice and Wheat Agriculture: Archaeobotanical Macro-Remains from
Baligang, Nanyang Basin, Central China (6700–500 BC)
https://www.academia.edu/16836382/From_Early_Domesticated_Rice_of_the_Middle_Ya
ngtze_Basin_to_Millet_Rice_and_Wheat_Agriculture_Archaeobotanical_Macro-
Remains_from_Baligang_Nanyang_Basin_Central_China_6700_500_BC_
101. Wogan-Browne, Jocelyn, et al. 2009 Language and Culture in Medieval Britain: The

64
French of England, c. 1100 – c. 1500. York Medieval Press (University of York), Boydell &
Brewer. Suffolk, U.K. 562 pp.
102. Yakar, Yak. The Nature and Extent of Neolithic Anatolia’s Contribution to the Emergence
of Farming Communities in the Balkans ― an Overview
https://www.academia.edu/33025599/yakar_fur_festschrift_nikolov_web.pdf
103. You, Frank. The structure of wild and domesticated emmer wheat populations, gene flow
between them, and the site of emmer domestication
https://www.academia.edu/32014519/The_structure_of_wild_and_domesticated_emmer_
wheat_populations_gene_flow_between_them_and_the_site_of_emmer_domestication
104. Younger, John G. Bibliography since 1980 (with slect papers prior) from: Linear A Texts
http://www.people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/biblio.html
105. Ibid. Linear A Reverse Lexicon
http://www.people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/lexicon_reverse.html
106. Zapata, Lydia. Hulled wheats in Spain: history of minor cereals
https://www.academia.edu/33394959/Hulled_wheats_in_Spain_history_of_minor_cereals
107. Ibid. Measuring grain size and assessing plant management during the EPPNB, results
from Tell Qarassa (southern Syria)
https://www.academia.edu/33337133/Measuring_grain_size_and_assessing_plant_manage
ment_during_the_EPPNB_results_from_Tell_Qarassa_southern_Syria_
108. Ibid. The spread of agriculture in northern Iberia: New archaeobotanical data from El
Mirón cave (Cantabria) and the open-air site of Los Cascajos (Navarra)
https://www.academia.edu/32531730/The_spread_of_agriculture_in_northern_Iberia_Ne
w_archaeobotanical_data_from_El_Mir%C3%B3n_cave_Cantabria_and_the_open-
air_site_of_Los_Cascajos_Navarra_

65