Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 34 of 34

Thread: Runic Source of Greek and Roman Alphabets?

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012 @ 10:44 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Europid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Washington Washington
    Location
    Yelm
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Polity capitated per constituent
    Religion
    a priori dialectic thelema/odal
    Posts
    285
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: Runic Source of Greek and Roman Alphabets?

    Quote Originally Posted by Oswiu View Post
    Stop quibbling over semantics [never mind teaching Grandad Oswiu to suck eggs] and answer my points.
    You didn't make any points. I never said the 'Germanics were the only ones to keep it'. It is related to all those above forms previously mentioned.

  2. #32
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Saturday, June 11th, 2016 @ 12:27 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Subrace
    CM-Atlantidish
    Country
    England England
    State
    Lancashire Lancashire
    Location
    Mamvcivm
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Politics
    Nationalist
    Religion
    British
    Posts
    3,586
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    13
    Thanked in
    13 Posts

    Re: Runic Source of Greek and Roman Alphabets?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nagelfar View Post
    You didn't make any points. I never said the 'Germanics were the only ones to keep it'. It is related to all those above forms previously mentioned.
    Can you state your position a little more clearly for me then, please?
    I read this;
    Quote Originally Posted by Nagelfar View Post
    This is true, though later rune rows, Frisian & Anglo-Saxon runes in addition to supplementary younger futhark runes, had these. So called 'dotted runes' etc. So as they became more of a Germanic property, and were longer in such hands as an exclusively Germanic script (not a pan-European script like the latin) it became less rudimentary. Therefore it was definitely evolving along Germanic inspired lines, and also in my opinion didn't come from a alien source but was preserved as the proto-European (not 'Indo-') cultures split & mixed.
    And then asked these questions -
    Quote Originally Posted by Oswiu View Post
    There is NO tradition of a common script among the IEans, in Europe or out.
    Why were the Germanics the only ones to keep it? Are we the Chosen? I thought only Semites fell for such vanities.
    If we kept it, tucked up in the north by the Baltic, why don't the Baltic speakers [Prussians, Lithuanians, Latvians] preserve a memory of it too, living cheek by jowl with us as they did? And why didn't our Finnic neighbours?

    Do you recognise a genetic relationship between the Mediterranean alphabets and the runes?
    - which could do with an answer.

  3. #33
    Senior Member Moody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 10th, 2012 @ 09:18 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Albion
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Investigator of Souls
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic Nationalist
    Religion
    Runosophy
    Posts
    1,904
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9
    Thanked in
    9 Posts

    Re: Runic Source of Greek and Roman Alphabets?

    Quote Originally Posted by Oswiu View Post
    If the runes are so 'perfect' for Germanic, where are the long and short vowels?
    The runes corresond to the basic sounds of Proto-Germanic with no otiose characters as Pollington says. When a language adopts an alien script, then it usually takes on such characters, as English has done.

    The Futhark accomodates the short vowel with the *ansuz rune, and and the long vowel with the *ihwaz rune, for example.

    Why is there not a division between THORN and ETH?
    Because this division was not present in Proto-Germanic.

    W and V?
    Because there was no 'V' in Proto-Germanic.

    Why aren't there any diphthong symbols to replace clumsy digraphs?
    The digraphs 'th' and 'ng' both have their own runes, [*thurisaz and *ingwaz respectively] for example.

    Note too the tradition of bind-runes meant that other dipthongs and digraphs could be rendered in a very subtle fashion.
    Anyone who has explored the beauty of Bind-Runes will know that there is nothing "clumsy" about them.

    If the common ancestors of all IE speakers had a script, why were their descendants so ready and willing to throw away this inheritance and adopt other scripts from their neighbours?
    No one is saying that they "threw it away"; rather that, like the location of the Aryan Homeland and the Proto-Indo-European language itself, these things may have been lost [or at least they have as far as present knowledge is concerned].
    However, the Futhark may preserve the actual characters of that "common IE script" as you call it, and this would account for why the runes cannot be satisfactorily explained according to much later influence from Etruscan.

    Greeks took Punic letters. Indians use descendants of Syriac and Aramaic. Tokharians did too. Many modern Aryans use the Arabic script. The Irish used an innovation of their own. Italics borrowed from their Etruscan neighbours' version of the Hellenised Punic abjad, or from the Greek script itself.
    Yes, and perhaps the Germanics alone retained their script, the Futhark. Accepting that the Aryans did not use syllabic writing as such, but had an organised and organic store of holy symbols, then it is possible that this system was entrusted only to one branch of the Aryans, the Nordics; they alone preserved it in its proper form [the Futhark], while other tribes had a variant [the alphabet].
    But as all Aryans from whatever branch viewed these symbols as something holy, they wouldn't have dreamed of using them as a syllabic script [especially for commerce].
    Only much later did the Aryan diaspora adopt the notion of a syllabic script, borrowing from others [and even the runes eventually began to be used as a syllabic script]. However, it is possible that the script used by the Phoenicians [and therefore used by the Greeks and Etruscans] was a corrupted version of that that same Aryan script.

    Why did the inhabitants of the PIE Urheimat [according to many] the Slavs and Scythians have NO memory of the mythical 'Aryan' script?
    The ancient Slavs certainly had a writing system [long before Cyrillic], but unfortunately little is known about it;
    indoeuro.bizland.com/project/script/slavi.html
    "There also appears to be some similarity between the Hungarian runes and the Scythian writing. [Although it is worth noting that that all runic forms of writing bear considerable similarity due to the limitations of the medium]".
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythian_languages

    Both examples are highly suggestive of a 'lost' holy Aryan script which could have been the Futhark and which was at least known by both the Slavs, and the Scythians.

    Most significant must be the evidence from the EARLIEST attested IE tongues; Persians took Mesopotamian cuneiform and abjad scripts [Sumerian and Semitic]. And the VERY earliest, the Hittites, also used Cuneiform, or employed a pictographic hieroglyph system with NO resemblance to the Runes whatsoever.
    These are all examples for the mediterranean region, of course, and therefore geographically and temporally distant from the Aryan Homeland and the later 'Germanic' diaspora to the Nordic regions.
    My contention is that the Futhark [but not necessarliy the alphabet] went in that direction, not south.

    Cuneiform [meaning 'wedge'] used a completely different medium [clay tablets] to that of runic, so one wouldn't expect it to resemble the Futhark.
    However, this should be noted:
    "The Sumerian script was adapted for the writing of the Akkadian, Elamite, Hittite, Assyrian and Luwian languages, and inspired the Old Persian and Ugaritic national alphabets. It was widely used in Mesopotamia for about 3,000 years, though the syllabic nature of the script as it was refined by the Sumerians was unintuitive to the Semitic speakers.
    http://www.crystalinks.com/sumerwriting.html

    Of course, L.A. Waddell claimed that the Sumerians were Aryans, even writing a book called The Aryan Origin of the Alphabet.
    http://www.forbesbookclub.com/bookpa...?prod_cd=IMWDN
    More recent ideas on similar, if not parallel, lines;
    http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Foru...SUMERIAN-5.htm

    However, this is taking us away from the thrust of this thread which is about the runes!

    Why does R in the runes look exactly the same as R in Etruscan and Latin? R is a fairly distinctive shape. I is simple, T too, Y as well, but the distinctiveness of R vertically and horizontally is too much to put this down to chance.
    The Estruscan R is more like a reversed P. It is the Latin R which is similar.
    I would say then that the Latin 'R' is possibly derived from the Runic 'R'.
    As the rune-stave in question refers to 'travel' [*raidho] it could have retained some significance to the migrating Aryans [and therefore been used as a symbol on their chariots, for example] and so lodged in the collective unconscious of the Aryans.
    It's shape resembles a very concise pictograph of a chariot.

    K, H, I, S, T, M, and O are also VERY close to the Mediterranean Punic derivates.
    I have already said that Runic S and T are close to Etruscan, while runic I is identical [whereas H, K and O are not].
    Note though that 'S' in the Futhark is the Sun, 'T' is the god Tyr and 'I' is ice.
    Strange that the most significantly Nordic and Germanic meanings are in those shapes retained!

    If the Syrians made up their abjad from an Aryan inspiration, WHO were these Aryans? Iranians who were using the wedge writing, or Anatolians who were also doing so?
    This is covered in the question about the Sumerians - but again, let us concentrate on the runes if we can.

    As for the restricted taboo nature of the runes, look at this list of usages;
    These are very late and long after any posited era of preistly taboo could have applied to the Futhark in the Aryan period.
    Why are there beings at all, & why not rather nothing?
    [Leibniz/Heidegger]

  4. #34
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, July 11th, 2018 @ 05:09 AM
    Ethnicity
    Ethnicity
    Ancestry
    Ancestry
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Posts
    2,129
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,488
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    128
    Thanked in
    106 Posts
    Very good thread. Oswiu just had to take a permanent leave of absence. I agree with the Alpine genesis of Runic, most likely via the Boii tribe, through the La Tene and Hallstatt sites of distribution. Later on Goths forked Runic with the Greco-Roman Alphabet in order to translate the Bible, which is precisely how they became Christian. I'm figuring that the Goths were relatively literate for their time, so it's ironic that they would be denigrated so much. The Vandals likewise had the ability to manage Carthage on its Roman ashes and hold everyone else ransom for food supplies. All the East Germanic tribes were Christian as a result of the fork between Runic and Greco-Roman. The particular manifestation of Christianity was Arian, due to the bias toward the Runic element, rather than be beholden necessarily to the Greco-Roman Pentarchy. Personally, I wish all Germanic would still be transcribed in a range between Runic to Gothic scripts, not the "Carolingian miniscule" or any other decidedly Antiqua format, which was part of the "Carolingian Renaissance", a polite way of describing Frankish treachery regarding the Papacy and divesting themselves of erstwhile Germanic heritage in the process of Romanisation--forcing it upon other tribes.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. The Influence of Roman/Greek Culture on Germanics and Its Value
    By Sawyer in forum Germanic & Indo-Germanic Origins
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: Thursday, April 19th, 2018, 08:41 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Thursday, April 19th, 2018, 08:03 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: Wednesday, August 25th, 2010, 11:30 PM
  4. Book: Blacks in the Ancient Greek and Roman World
    By jeba dan in forum Literature & Book Reviews
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, November 1st, 2004, 02:23 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •