Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 06:13, 23 October 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Phaistos Disc article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Writing systems High‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Visual arts This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts Archaeology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Greece High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Classical Greece and Rome High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Misplaced Pages's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Phaistos Disc. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Phaistos Disc at the Reference desk.

Archives

• Talk:Phaistos Disc/Archive1: discussion of unicity distance, minimal length for decipherment
• Talk:Phaistos Disc/Archive2, 3, 4, 5, 6

dispute over notability of J. Faucounau's reading

Golden Ring from Mavro Spelio

Just for your information, Mr Bachmann, may I call your attention upon the "Annexe n° 3" of the J.Faucounau's book Les Origines grecques à l'Age de Bronze ? It is a very short, accessory study of the said inscription, considered by J.F. as the only known document in Linear A, which could be written in Proto-Ionian Greek. A translation has even been given, but considered by the author as nothing but an interesting possibility (personal discussion with J.F. about one year ago). J.F. has emphasized in another article (unpublished but that he was kind enough to give me a copy of) that Linear A has been used to write several languages (including Semitic). But, of course, you will consider all this as amateur's dreaming , I guess... You are so well informed by one of your compatriots, Mr Bachmann !.. (User 80.90.57.154 , 17:12, March 26, 2006).

Why is this still semi-protected?

This was semi-protected more than a decade ago, is it still necessary to have it be semi-protected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophia wisdom (talk • contribs) 02:16, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Of course not, but this is now an established fiefdom, as is par for the course on Misplaced Pages, and I suspect the power and control won't be easily relinquished. 139.138.6.121 (talk) 02:20, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 February 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

24 Alexq181 (talk) 00:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

​It's not clear what edit you want made. You can suggest edits here on this talk page on the form "Please change X to Y" citing reliable sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 00:24, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Why has there still be no proper dating attempted?

I do tend to side with Eisenberg that this object is probably a fraud. Too many times object have been forged and especially when object are "one of a kind" one has to be very sceptical if not found in a clear archaeological providence. Many people seem to think "not guilty until proven guilty" is the normal approach, but in these cases the scientific approach should be "guilty until proven not guilty". See also the recent events of finds like the "Jezus-sarcophagus" and the "Wife of Jezus-papyrus". Time and time again scientist have been easily fooled by frauds.

So I find it very strange that when there is a good way of dating the object by thermoluminescence without destroying it, the Greek archaeology department does not use this method to end the discussion once and for all. Are they afraid of what they expect to find when taken it to the test? Surely (lack of) money can not the reason, as there are many excellent laboratories who would love to do this research for free (who would not want to take the chance of studying this object).

Semi-protected edit request on 5 April 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Although the Phaistos Disc is generally accepted as authentic by archaeologists, a few scholars believe that the disc is a forgery or a hoax.

if appropriate please name the scholars and or show us the references for this statement thanks 70.189.223.151 (talk) 18:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: See the "Authenticity" section. Three sources are given for "hoax" statement. RudolfRed (talk) 21:06, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 May 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the section Dating the date by Godart should be changed: Currently: ... the disc may be dated to anywhere in Middle or Late Minoan times (MMI–LMIII, a period spanning most of the second millennium B.C.) Should be: ... the disc may be dated to anywhere in Middle Minoan III or Late Minoan times (MMIII–LMIII, a period spanning most of the second millennium B.C.)

Source: J. Best, https://www.academia.edu/66972374/The_Phaistos_disc_a_Luwian_letter_to_Nestor p. 25 (next-to-last paragraph says Minoen Moyenne III); unfortunately, I currently don't have access to the original source https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k1003816q/f210.item for double checking Mtrognitz (talk) 10:26, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

The Godart quote given at Best p.25 in fact says "On a donc, en bonne méthode, le droit d’imaginer que le disc peut appartenir à n’importe quelle période comprise entre le Minoen Moyen III et les époques grecques tardives": i.e. anytime from MMIII to "the late Greek period". It also seems to me from a quick skim that the summary of Best's position is really overstating things; he suggests a date range for PH1 ending in 1340 (not exactly the "first half of the 14th century") and concludes that the archaeological evidence for PH 1 only has a bearing on when the Phaistos Disc fell into the position it was discovered in, and doesn't show when it was written. I don't have time at the moment, but it seems as though the entire section on dating might need some work... Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 09:05, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

 Closing this request for now, re-activate if you come to a consensus. ;; Maddy ♥︎(they/she)♥︎ :: talk  19:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Directionality

Evans, at one point, believed that the disc had been written from the center out. Evans later changed his mind and determined that the disc was written from the outside in toward the center. Several scholars including Jean Faucounau, Yves Duhoux, Gareth Owens, and others, have agreed that Evans second opinion was correct - that the disc was written from the outside in and have claimed that this is the consensus view. Still others including Derk Ohlenroth and Kjell Aarton, and Thomas Balistier are not convinced by this claim and have presented strong arguments that the writing was created from the center out. (See Balistier 2000, pp 79-90). If they are correct and the disc was written from the center out, then all of the figures shown below, which differ from the originals in having been transposed left-to-right, are inaccurate. (See Phaistos Disc decipherment claims). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:14D:4880:2B80:AD95:980A:6BF4:ECD6 (talk) 01:06, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Sign descriptions are unsourced; original research?

The "descriptions" column of the signs table are not descriptions but interpretations. They are unsourced and obviously only conjectural and debatable. Are they "original research"? Jorge Stolfi (talk) 20:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

• Removed that column. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 11:43, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

"Decoding Minoan script" pdf, SafeCreative registered Jan 12th, 2024

Some weeks ago I registered (Spanish Register of Intellectual Property, and SafeCreative) a research re Minoan script, where I could read and understand all known Minoan artefacts including Phaistos Disk, Axe of Arkalochori, Altar of Malia, fragment HM_992 and others. The document approach is to consider Minoan as an ideographic script, not a syllabic one contrarilly to the current consensus. Results are spectacular, and beatifull. I have already sent the document by email to many researchers and institutions I saw involved in publishing papers about it. Sorry, I cannot/I do not know how to attach the pdf here, so I'm afraid you should go to the SafeCreative page and reach me through the email shown there in case you are interested. Hope yoy enjoy as much as I did when writing it. Here is the SafeCreative link: https://www.safecreative.org/work/2401126629270-decoding-minoan-writing JALM69 (talk) 19:32, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

• B-Class Writing system articles
• High-importance Writing system articles
• B-Class visual arts articles
• WikiProject Visual arts articles
• B-Class Archaeology articles
• High-importance Archaeology articles
• B-Class Greek articles
• High-importance Greek articles
• WikiProject Greece general articles
• All WikiProject Greece pages
• B-Class Classical Greece and Rome articles
• High-importance Classical Greece and Rome articles
• All WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome pages