Skip to main content

Murfatlar script (Part 3)






Part Three
Comparative analysis


The first researchers of the Murfatlar runic inscriptions are trying to establish the origin of this writing system. Romanian archaeologists focus on both the Greek alphabet and the Old Germanic runes, as well as the Orkhon-Yenisei script. (Barnya, J. 1962, Komsha M. 1964, Bogdan D. 1960) Beshevliev made a comparative graphic analysis of the Murfatlar signs with the steppe scripts from Europe and Asia, the Old German runes and the signs from Northeastern Bulgaria. He is adamant that the runes from Murfatlar are closer to the signs from Northeastern Bulgaria and to the steppe writing systems. Beshevliev also notes the presence of four Cyrillic letters among the Murfatlar runes. He admits the possibility that the creator of the Cyrillic alphabet borrowed them from the runic alphabet (Beshevliev, V. 1977). P. Georgiev sees in the Murfatlar signs changed Greek letters (Georgiev P. 1995). Popkonstantinov believes that Murfatlar signs originated as cryptography based on Cyrillic, Glagolitic, Greek and runic signs (Popkonstantinov K. 2003). Kizlasov acknowledges that there are also quite a few unique graphemes in the Murfatlar letter (Kyzlasov I. 1994).
Although the graphic proximity would hardly help to decipher the Murfatlar inscriptions, I made this comparative analysis both to get a more complete picture of the similarities and differences of the Murfatlar signs with the written systems considered their potential prototype: the Orkhon-Yenisei runes, the Don-Cuban letter, the inscriptions from northeastern Bulgaria, the Greek alphabet, the Cyrillic alphabet, the Glagolitic alphabet, the Carpathian runes and the letter of the secularists.

Orkhon-Yenisei script


The first specimens of the Orkhon-Yenisei script were found in the valley of the Orkhon River and date from the beginning of the 8th century. Due to their graphic resemblance to the runic alphabet, they are called Orkhon runes. In the Orkhon script, some of the consonants have two forms depending on whether they are used with front and back vowels. There are also signs representing two consonants. Since the Orkhon letter was deciphered by W. Thomson, many long and short inscriptions have been translated. The shape of the letters and their sound values ​​have been established and their palaeography specified. The Orkhon Yenisei script is believed to have been based on one of the Semitic alphabets of Central Asia and local pictographic signs. In connection with the Murfatlar script, it is interesting that some scholars believe that the Orkhon-Yenisei script and the Eastern European runes are genetically related.
In the table below, based on materials from Kononov (Kononov A. 1980), I compare the three parts of the Orkhon-Yenisei script (Thalassian, Yenisei and Orkhon) with the 44 most common Murfatlar signs. Column 6 shows their shapes, and column 7 shows their serial number. It is established that 13 of the Murfatlar signs are graphically close to the Orkhon runes.







Don-Kuban Script

(Comparative analysis)





The first artefacts of the steppe script found in Eastern Europe are the inscriptions from the Nag St. Miklos treasure in 1799 and the text on a clay pot from the Tsaritsyn region in 1896. Later, runic inscriptions from Mayatskoye and Humara were discovered. Initially, some scholars believe that these inscriptions have a common origin with the Orkhon-Yenisei (Donner O. 1896, Melioransky P.). Nemeth, and later Malov, questioned this view and considered the Eastern European runes as a different letter (Németh J. 1932, Malov S. 1936). Turchaninov made an attempt to decipher the Eastern European runes with the help of the language of the Ossetians (Turchaninov G. 1971). Altheim came up with a hypothesis, later refined by Hausig, that the Orkh-Yenisei script and Eastern European runes originated from different variants of the Semitic alphabets used for the languages ​​of the Iranian group (Altheim F. 1948, Haussig H. 1985).
In an article on the newly discovered Sarvas inscription, the Hungarian linguist A. Rona-Tash divided the runic inscriptions from Eastern Europe into 5 geographical regions: the North Caucasus, the Volga region, Dobrudzha, Eastern Bulgaria, the Carpathians (Rona-Tas A. 1988). Kizlasov makes a slightly different division. Based on an in-depth analysis, he divided the steppe alphabets into two groups: Asian and Eurasian. The Asian group includes the Orchon Yenisei letter. The Eurasian alphabet includes the Don, Cuban, Ashikta, South Yenisei and Isfaran alphabets. Outside the ranking, Kizlasov leaves the runic inscriptions from the Balkans and the Carpathian Basin (Kyzlasov I. 1994). Here I will make a comparison between the five alphabets of the Eurasian group according to Kizlasov's classification on the one hand and the Murfatlar runes on the other. Similar to the signs from the Murfatlar inscriptions are as follows: 14 from the Don, 13 from the Cuban, 10 from the South Yenisei, 11 from the Ashiktash and 5 from the Isfarin signs.






Comparative Analysis - Greek Alphabet


    The Greek language and the Greek alphabet were the official language and script in early medieval Bulgaria until the admission of the students of Cyril and Methodius by Prince Boris in 886. Today we have over 70 inscriptions issued by the Bulgarian state on various occasions. The earliest are from the time of Tervel and the latest from the time of Simeon (Beshevliev V. 1979). Perhaps that is why the Glagolitic alphabet was replaced in Bulgaria by the newly created Cyrillic alphabet, which is based entirely on the Greek unique (Grammar of the Old Bulgarian Language 1991).

    In the table below I compare 44 of the Murfatlar signs with the letters of the Greek alphabet used in four proto-Bulgarian inscriptions. Nine of the Murfatlar runes coincide in shape with the letters of the Greek alphabet.







Comparative Analisis- Cyrillic

    


    It was originally thought that the alphabet created in about 863 by Cyril and Methodius for writing liturgical books in the Slavic language was Cyrillic (Both Dobrovski and Sreznevski), and the Glagolitic alphabet was cryptography. Currently, most scholars believe that the Glagolitic alphabet was created by the holy brothers and the Cyrillic alphabet by one of their students based on the Greek unique by adding letters for the missing Slavic sounds in the Greek alphabet (Ivanova T. 2004, Grammar of the Old Bulgarian Language 1991).
     In the table below I compare the 44 Murfatlar signs with the letters of the Cyrillic alphabet. Ten of the Murfatlar signs coincide in shape with Cyrillic letters.







Comparative Analisis- Glagolitic

      Nowadays, almost all Slavists believe that the Glagolitic alphabet was created by Constantine-Cyril the Philosopher to write liturgical books in the Slavic language after 863. However, there are many theories about the origin of the Glagolitic letters. Some authors assume that the prototype of the Glagolitic alphabet is the Greek minischool (Taylor, Jagic), while others assume that some of the letters are modelled on the Hebrew, Coptic and Armenian alphabets (A. Ralphs, W. Vondrak, N. Grunski). According to G. Chernokhvostov, the Glagolitic letters were created as a combination of three main Christian symbols - a cross, a circle and a triangle (Ivanova T. 2004, Grammar of the Old Bulgarian Language 1991).
      In the table below I compare the 44 Murfatlar signs with the Glagolitic letters. Ten of the Murfatlar signs coincide in form with Glagolitic letters. Due to the special rounded form of the Glagolitic, such a comparison with the straight lines of the runes is somewhat conditional.








The Carpathian runic alphabet is known from two finds: the world-famous treasure from Nag St. Miklos and the needle box from Sarvash. The treasure of Nagy St. Miklos was discovered in 1799 and consists of 23 golden vessels. 12 runic inscriptions are engraved on the vessels. According to Mavrodinov and most of the Bulgarian scientists, the treasure and the inscriptions are proto-Bulgarian (Mavrodinov N. 1943). According to Yu. Nemeth, who is trying to decipher the inscriptions, they are Pecheneg (Nemet Yu. 1986). According to Laszlo, the inscriptions from the NSM were written in Hungarian and according to G. Nagy and I. Bona in Avar (Nagy G. 1895, Bona I. 1984). In 1983, during archaeological excavations not far from the Hungarian town of Sarvas, a needle box with a 59-character inscription was found. Of the 19 separate characters from Sarvash, 15 are identical to the characters from NSM. According to Hungarian scholars, the inscription from Sarvas was written in the alphabet with which the inscriptions from the NSM were written (Rona-Tash A. 1985).
         In the table below I compare the 44 Murfatlar signs with the Carpathian runes. Eleven of the Murfatlar signs coincide in shape with the Carpathian runes.





















Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Runiform Inscriptions from Madara

  Since Felix Kanitz discovered for the science the Madara Rider, the area around the village of Madara (District Shumen, Bulgaria) cached the attention of Bulgarian archaeologists. Karel Skorpil believed that the Madara Rider had an ancient origin and belonged to the Thracian culture. However, discovered around the Relief Greek inscriptions containing the names of early Bulgarian rulers led the opinions in the direction of the Bulgarian origin of the monument. Soon several caves and ruins of buildings were discovered in the area. Bulgarian archaeological circles grew the idea that the surroundings of the village of Madara, which was situated some 20 km. from the capital, Pliska had great importance in Medieval times. Thus in 1925, the Bulgarian archaeological institute decided to start excavations. The research took place in 1925 and 1926 and continued in 1936. The cultural layers discovered there began in the Neolithic and, without interruption, continued to the Ottoman period. A...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Byala Inscription

      At the beginning of the 20th century , young Bulgarian archaeology brought new discoveries in the field of Runiform script. It thus enriched the collection of Runiform inscriptions found at Pliska. This time findings came from the ramparts near the Black Sea shore, built by the Early Bulgarian state. The Byala Inscription     Newly found inscriptions were two. The first was incised on a column found at the rampart near Varna. It consists of three graphemes well known from the materials from Pliska ( ).  The second inscription not only brought to light two new characters (  and  ),  but its length was sensational: five graphemes. The discovery came from the rampart near the small town of Byala. The inscription is engraved carefully on a stone block of yellow limestone. At the time of discovery, there was still some red plaster in the grooves of the inscription, which indicates that the inscription initially appeared red on ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Aboba 1899 - the Beginning (Part 2)

  However, some of the graphic materials found in 1899 at Pliska give reason to think that the system of “signs” is more than masonry marks. For example, some characters are incised in groups of two or three and sometimes form a ligature. However, the researchers of the time were digging into ruins filled with hundreds of pieces of Greek, Roman and Cyrillic inscriptions. The dilemma of the character of the newly discovered system of signs could be only: masonry marks or letters of an alphabet. Even if some of those signs were letters of an unknown alphabet, a string of three letters can barely make a word, and of course, it is hard to be assumed as an inscription. Ruins of Pliska This is probably why they didn’t notice that the same system of "signs" was used in drawings they discovered on the walls and bricks of Pliska. It is true that those signs are incorporated into the pictures and usually look like random scratches, and when Skorpil noticed that there were signs in the ...
Post a Comment
Read more