DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.805#0056
[316] PEIMITIVE PICTOGRAPHS AND SCRIPT 47
It will be seen from the above list that there are some eighty-two
symbols classified under the following heads:
The human body and its parts
Arms, implements and instruments
Parts of houses and household utensils
Mari ne subj ects
Animals and birds
Vegetable forms
Heavenly bodies and derivatives
Geographical or topographical signs
Geometrical figures
Uncertain symbols
17
8
3
17
8
6
1
4
12
The numerous comparisons made with Egyptian hieroglyphs in the
course of the above analysis do not by any means involve the conclusion that
we have in the Cretan signs merely their blundered imitation. Where such
occur, as in the case of a well-known class of Phoenician and of some Cypriote
Greek objects, we are confronted with very different results. Had there been
any attempt to copy Egyptian cartouches or inscriptions, we should infallibly
have found, as in the above cases, travesties or imperfect renderings of
Egyptian forms. But imitative figures of this kind do not make their
appearance, and no attempt has been made to copy even the commonest of
the Egyptian characters. Such parallelism as does appear is at most the
parallelism of an independent system drawn from a common source. Nor are
affinities of this kind by any means confined to Egypt.
Among the closer parallels with the signs of other hieroglyphic systems
that it has been possible to indicate, about sixteen (or 20 per cent.) approach
Egyptian and an equal number Hittite forms: mere general resemblances,
such as those presented by certain figures of fish, birds, &c, being excluded
from this rough calculation. Considering that the choice of comparisons is
in the case of the Egyptian hieroglyphs very much larger than that of the
Hittite, it will be seen that the proportion of affinities distinctly inclines to
the Asianic side. Certain signs, such as the wolfs head with the tongue
hanging out (No. 44), the he-goat's head (No. 35), the arrow (No. 13), the
three-balled spray (No. 54), and Nos. 41, 57, 79 and 80, clearly point to a
fundamental relationship between the Hittite and Cretan systems. The
double axe moreover is characteristically Asianic, but as certainly not
Egyptian. The single axe of the form represented in No. 8 is also non-
Egyptian. We are struck too by the absence of the distinctively religious
symbols which in Egyptian hieroglyphics are of such constant recurrence.
In the Hittite series, on the other hand, as in the Cretan, this hieratic
element, though it no doubt exists, does not certainly take up so conspicuous
a position.
The somewhat promiscuous way in which the signs are disposed in some
of the spaces, notably on Fig. 22b, is strikingly suggestive of the Hittite
It will be seen from the above list that there are some eighty-two
symbols classified under the following heads:
The human body and its parts
Arms, implements and instruments
Parts of houses and household utensils
Mari ne subj ects
Animals and birds
Vegetable forms
Heavenly bodies and derivatives
Geographical or topographical signs
Geometrical figures
Uncertain symbols
17
8
3
17
8
6
1
4
12
The numerous comparisons made with Egyptian hieroglyphs in the
course of the above analysis do not by any means involve the conclusion that
we have in the Cretan signs merely their blundered imitation. Where such
occur, as in the case of a well-known class of Phoenician and of some Cypriote
Greek objects, we are confronted with very different results. Had there been
any attempt to copy Egyptian cartouches or inscriptions, we should infallibly
have found, as in the above cases, travesties or imperfect renderings of
Egyptian forms. But imitative figures of this kind do not make their
appearance, and no attempt has been made to copy even the commonest of
the Egyptian characters. Such parallelism as does appear is at most the
parallelism of an independent system drawn from a common source. Nor are
affinities of this kind by any means confined to Egypt.
Among the closer parallels with the signs of other hieroglyphic systems
that it has been possible to indicate, about sixteen (or 20 per cent.) approach
Egyptian and an equal number Hittite forms: mere general resemblances,
such as those presented by certain figures of fish, birds, &c, being excluded
from this rough calculation. Considering that the choice of comparisons is
in the case of the Egyptian hieroglyphs very much larger than that of the
Hittite, it will be seen that the proportion of affinities distinctly inclines to
the Asianic side. Certain signs, such as the wolfs head with the tongue
hanging out (No. 44), the he-goat's head (No. 35), the arrow (No. 13), the
three-balled spray (No. 54), and Nos. 41, 57, 79 and 80, clearly point to a
fundamental relationship between the Hittite and Cretan systems. The
double axe moreover is characteristically Asianic, but as certainly not
Egyptian. The single axe of the form represented in No. 8 is also non-
Egyptian. We are struck too by the absence of the distinctively religious
symbols which in Egyptian hieroglyphics are of such constant recurrence.
In the Hittite series, on the other hand, as in the Cretan, this hieratic
element, though it no doubt exists, does not certainly take up so conspicuous
a position.
The somewhat promiscuous way in which the signs are disposed in some
of the spaces, notably on Fig. 22b, is strikingly suggestive of the Hittite