Deciphering the linear character A
Can read but cannot understand Minoa's record
There are symbols similar to the linear character B written later in Greek on Crete's clay plate. We can estimate the sound value of some symbols and read them, but the meaning of the words is still not understood.
The currently possible conclusion is the level of partial understanding of the accounting structure and some symbolic functions. The claim of complete deciphering assuming the Minoan language first lacks reproducibility. The real breakthrough is likely to be long text or bilingual inscriptions.
Prologue: Recorded Night
After the night deepens, the data was spread on the desk. The first thing that caught my eye was not the answer, but the imbalance. Some scenes were as clear as photographs and some time zones were empty as a whole. People try to capture one clear scene and explain the whole thing, but I marked the empty section first. Mysteries arise because there are many clues, but they also arise because the distance between clues is too far.
The linear letter A was used in Crete and the Aegean Sea between approximately 1800 and 1450 BC. It remained on administrative clay tablets, seals, and ritual objects, and some of the numbers, fountains, and object signs are presumed to be contextual. However, the recorded language is unknown and there are no long bilingual documents.
I deliberately read the famous hypothesis at the end. First of all, when we encounter the conclusion, it seems that all objects and symbols exist for that conclusion. Therefore, the timetable, place, object, and original text were organized first, and the witness and interpretation were placed in different compartments. The novel-like atmosphere was drawn from the cold texture of the actual record, not from a made-up secret.
Case File: What I Could Believe
20313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556| Number | Confirmed Record | Current Reliability |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | The linear letter A was mainly used in the Bronze Age Crete. The | High |
| 2 | symbolic system resembles the linear letter B, but even if the same sound value is applied, it does not become a known Greek. Many of the | High |
| 3 | data are short administrative records and lists. | High |
| 4 | Water, fountain, and some article signs can be compared by repetition position and context. | Medium |
| 5 | There is no definite bilingual inscription and long enough narrative text. | Medium |
The system of recorded language, most of the symbols' exact phonetic songs, and the distinction between proper and general nouns have not been established.
'Unexplained' is not the same as 'supernatural', 'a huge conspiracy', and 'only this hypothesis is possible'. I didn't count the blanks as evidence.
Scene Reconstruction: Finally, the place of the certain point
was changed to the actual movement, not the stage in your head. We divided the starting point, the last check point, and the location where the item was found and calculated the minimum time required in between. When the dramatic description of later generations was removed, small and specific elements such as sound and lighting, doors and roads, paper and ink, and the spacing of symbols came forward.
The person's mind was not fixed and the action was written first. The same behavior can be caused by fear, planning, error, and fatigue. If it is a code, the same symbol can be a sound, a word, a separator, and a meaningless sign. After writing down all possible roles, he erased the roles that conflict with other records one by one.
Clue 1. The linear letter A was mainly used in the Bronze Age Crete.
I split this sentence into three pieces first. It indicated who first checked, how close the confirmation was to the incident, and where the later interpretation was attached. Old events and codes turn into clearer stories than the original while being repeatedly cited. But clarity is not the same thing as accuracy. In my notes, I separated the direct record, the traces left by the object, and the reasoning of later generations into different colors.
This clue was then confronted with the record, "The symbolic system resembles the linear letter B, but even if the same sound value is applied, it does not become known Greek." It is not a good hypothesis if one hypothesis explains only the first sentence and avoids the second sentence. In particular, if you fail to pass the question, "Can the symbols of the same shape be considered to have the same sound in the two letters?" the attractive explanation also lowered the score. I've seen clues that make the conclusion uncomfortable longer than clues that make the conclusion cool.
If you look at the clues this way, the case seems a little less dramatic. Instead, there is a boundary between how far it is clear and where it is imagined. That boundary is necessary to correct reasoning when new data are released. The most dangerous moment in the unwritten record is not when you make a false hypothesis, but when you turn the hypothesis into a sentence of fact.
Clue 2. The sign system resembles the linear letter B, but even if the same sound value is applied, it does not become known Greek.
I split this sentence into three pieces first. It indicated who first checked, how close the confirmation was to the incident, and where the later interpretation was attached. Old events and codes turn into clearer stories than the original while being repeatedly cited. But clarity is not the same thing as accuracy. In my notes, I separated the direct record, the traces left by the object, and the reasoning of later generations into different colors.
This clue was then confronted with the record that "many of the data are short administrative records and lists." It is not a good hypothesis if one hypothesis explains only the first sentence and avoids the second sentence. In particular, if you fail to pass the question, "Is the repetition of the list a word, a quantity unit, or a person's name?" the attractive explanation also lowered the score. I've seen clues that make the conclusion uncomfortable longer than clues that make the conclusion cool.
If you look at the clues this way, the case seems a little less dramatic. Instead, there is a boundary between how far it is clear and where it is imagined. That boundary is necessary to correct reasoning when new data are released. The most dangerous moment in the unwritten record is not when you make a false hypothesis, but when you turn the hypothesis into a sentence of fact.
Clue 3. Many of the data are short administrative records and lists.
I split this sentence into three pieces first. It indicated who first checked, how close the confirmation was to the incident, and where the later interpretation was attached. Old events and codes turn into clearer stories than the original while being repeatedly cited. But clarity is not the same thing as accuracy. In my notes, I separated the direct record, the traces left by the object, and the reasoning of later generations into different colors.
This clue was then confronted with the record, "Water, fountain, and some article signs can be compared by repetition position and context." It is not a good hypothesis if one hypothesis explains only the first sentence and avoids the second sentence. In particular, attractive explanations also lowered scores if they failed to pass the question, "What external standards are needed for statistical rules to move on to meaning decoding?" I've seen clues that make the conclusion uncomfortable longer than clues that make the conclusion cool.
If you look at the clues this way, the case seems a little less dramatic. Instead, there is a boundary between how far it is clear and where it is imagined. That boundary is necessary to correct reasoning when new data are released. The most dangerous moment in the unwritten record is not when you make a false hypothesis, but when you turn the hypothesis into a sentence of fact.
Clue 4. Water, fountain, and some article signs can be compared by repetition position and context.
I split this sentence into three pieces first. It indicated who first checked, how close the confirmation was to the incident, and where the later interpretation was attached. Old events and codes turn into clearer stories than the original while being repeatedly cited. But clarity is not the same thing as accuracy. In my notes, I separated the direct record, the traces left by the object, and the reasoning of later generations into different colors.
This clue was then confronted with the record, "No definite bilingual inscription and long enough narrative text." It is not a good hypothesis if one hypothesis explains only the first sentence and avoids the second sentence. In particular, if you fail to pass the question, "Can the symbols of the same shape be considered to have the same sound in the two letters?" the attractive explanation also lowered the score. I've seen clues that make the conclusion uncomfortable longer than clues that make the conclusion cool.
If you look at the clues this way, the case seems a little less dramatic. Instead, there is a boundary between how far it is clear and where it is imagined. That boundary is necessary to correct reasoning when new data are released. The most dangerous moment in the unwritten record is not when you make a false hypothesis, but when you turn the hypothesis into a sentence of fact.
Clue 5. No solid bilingual inscriptions and long enough narrative text.
I split this sentence into three pieces first. It indicated who first checked, how close the confirmation was to the incident, and where the later interpretation was attached. Old events and codes turn into clearer stories than the original while being repeatedly cited. But clarity is not the same thing as accuracy. In my notes, I separated the direct record, the traces left by the object, and the reasoning of later generations into different colors.
This clue was then confronted with the record, "Linear letter A was mainly used in the Bronze Age Crete." It is not a good hypothesis if one hypothesis explains only the first sentence and avoids the second sentence. In particular, if you fail to pass the question, "Is the repetition of the list a word, a quantity unit, or a person's name?" the attractive explanation also lowered the score. I've seen clues that make the conclusion uncomfortable longer than clues that make the conclusion cool.
If you look at the clues this way, the case seems a little less dramatic. Instead, there is a boundary between how far it is clear and where it is imagined. That boundary is necessary to correct reasoning when new data are released. The most dangerous moment in the unwritten record is not when you make a false hypothesis, but when you turn the hypothesis into a sentence of fact.
Put three hypotheses on the same scale The
hypothesis was not evaluated as a cool sentence. The number of clues to be explained, the number of newly requested assumptions, and the degree to which they endure the opposite evidence were written, respectively. Even if one clue is fully explained, it is not a good hypothesis if the other records have to be discarded.
Restores the shape of Minoan by applying a limited sound value of the symbol shared with Hypothesis A. Linear character B.
This explanation has the advantage of accepting "the linear letter A was mainly used in the Bronze Age Crete" as a relatively small assumption. I assumed that this hypothesis was correct and walked time and space all over again. Each time people, objects, and symbols moved to the next location, they wrote down the actions and times they needed. There must have been a hidden assumption at the point where the sentence was cut off.
The biggest weakness is that it does not fully explain "many of the data are short administrative records and lists." If you keep adding accomplices, coincidences, and lost things to keep the hypothesis alive, you can explain anything. However, such an explanation does not predict new clues. I only scored when two independent records pointed in the same direction, and I scored every time I called in a new exception.
117100118So, whether or not to adopt this hypothesis as a conclusion was judged not by atmosphere but by cost. The number of clues to be explained, the number of newly requested households, and the degree to which they endure evidence against them are listed in the same table. Novel scenes were used to show the texture of facts, but not as evidence to fill in the blanks.
119101120Hypothesis B. Look for grammatical roles in the repetition of prefixes, prefixes, and word positions without getting the language right first.
121102122This explanation has the advantage of accepting "the symbolic system resembles the linear letter B, but it does not become known Greek even if the same sound value is applied." as a relatively small assumption. I assumed that this hypothesis was correct and walked time and space all over again. Each time people, objects, and symbols moved to the next location, they wrote down the actions and times they needed. There must have been a hidden assumption at the point where the sentence was cut off.
123103124The biggest weakness is that it does not fully explain "water, fountains, and some article signs can be compared by repeated position and context." If you keep adding accomplices, coincidences, and lost things to keep the hypothesis alive, you can explain anything. However, such an explanation does not predict new clues. I only scored when two independent records pointed in the same direction, and I scored every time I called in a new exception.
125104126So, whether or not to adopt this hypothesis as a conclusion was judged not by atmosphere but by cost. The number of clues to be explained, the number of newly requested households, and the degree to which they endure evidence against them are listed in the same table. Novel scenes were used to show the texture of facts, but not as evidence to fill in the blanks.
127105128Hypothesis C. Only partial deciphering is acknowledged until a long document or bilingual material that has not yet been unearthed.
129106130"Many of the data are short administrative records and lists," the explanation said.It has the advantage of accepting " as a relatively small assumption. I assumed that this hypothesis was correct and walked time and space all over again. Each time people, objects, and symbols moved to the next location, they wrote down the actions and times they needed. There must have been a hidden assumption at the point where the sentence was cut off.
131107132The biggest weakness is that it does not fully explain "there are no definite bilingual inscriptions and long enough narrative text." If you keep adding accomplices, coincidences, and lost things to keep the hypothesis alive, you can explain anything. However, such an explanation does not predict new clues. I only scored when two independent records pointed in the same direction, and I scored every time I called in a new exception.
133108134So, whether or not to adopt this hypothesis as a conclusion was judged not by atmosphere but by cost. The number of clues to be explained, the number of newly requested households, and the degree to which they endure evidence against them are listed in the same table. Novel scenes were used to show the texture of facts, but not as evidence to fill in the blanks.
Conclusions I abandoned
137111138When I started the investigation, I was also drawn to the most famous explanation. It organized the case into one sentence and gave intention to everything. However, in contrast to the original record, each blank required a new coincidence. I erased the conclusion then and started again. Good reasoning is not about adding anything, but about removing unnecessary assumptions.
139112140I discarded the method of selecting only meaningful pieces after substituting the phonetic tables of the linear letter B. Instead, it started in sections with external contexts, such as numbers and article signs. Then, the distance between 'read sound' and 'deciphering meaning' became clear.
141113142In particular, the details repeated on later articles and the Internet were separated from the source. Just because the same sentence appears in multiple places does not mean that there are multiple independent sources. We first checked the possibility that one error was duplicated. After this process, the case became less colorful, but the weight of the remaining clues increased.
Anti-evidence: Sentence to destroy my reasoning
145116146The investigation ends quickly if I gather data that upholds my conclusion. So I put the three most uncomfortable questions next to the conclusion.
147117148- Can the symbols of the same shape be considered to have the same sound in two letters 150119151
- Repetition of a list is a word, a unit of quantity, or a person's name 152120153
- What external criteria are needed for statistical rules to move to meaning decoding
These questions are not decorative. It is a switch that will change its conclusion when new data comes in. The ranking of the hypotheses changes immediately when directly linked information, such as the sighting source, preserved physical evidence, comparative samples from the same author, and independent dating. On the contrary, when the word "likely" increased, the ranking did not change.
Final Reasoning: I Reached
159125160The currently possible conclusion is the level of partial understanding of the accounting structure and some symbolic functions. The claim of complete deciphering assuming the Minoan language first lacks reproducibility. The real breakthrough is likely to be long text or bilingual inscriptions.
This conclusion is not a complete final judgment. The direction calls for the fewest assumptions in the currently disclosed records and explains the most clues at the same time. It is also clear that what comes out changes the conclusion. Reliable original records, verifiable legal science data, and independent evidence directly linking people and objects are needed.
163127164I do not write that the case is closed. Instead, write down how far you can close it. That boundary is the result of this investigation. The fun of mystery is not that anything is possible. It's about finding out what you can throw away among the possible explanations.
Additional Survey Record 1. Redraw the timetable
167130168I re-opened the material on the desk and covered the conclusion this time. The linear letter A was mainly used in the Bronze Age Crete, leaving only "the place and time in a line. Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section.
169131170On top of it, the explanation was posted, "Restore the form of Minoan by applying the sound value of the symbol shared with the linear character B in a limited way." At first, everything seemed right, but when I substituted the question, "Can it be considered that the symbols of the same shape made the same sound in the two letters?" a weak connection was revealed. Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
171132172The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
173133174Further investigation record 2. Disappeared link
175134176I re-opened the material on the desk and covered the conclusion this time. The symbolic system resembles the linear letter B, but even if the same sound value is applied, it does not become known Greek. The place and time were continued in one line. Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section.
177135178On top of it, the explanation was posted, "Find the grammar role in the repetition of prefixes, prefixes, and word positions without getting the language right first." At first, everything seemed right, but when I substituted the question, "Is the iteration of the list a word, a quantity unit, or a person's name?" a weak connection was revealed. Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
179136180The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
181137182Further investigation record 3. The path of movement of objects
183138184I re-opened the material on the desk and covered the conclusion this time. Many of the data are short administrative records and lists."The place and the time were lined up, leaving only one behind. Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section.
185139186On top of it, I posted the explanation, "I only accept partial decoding until long documents or bilingual materials that have not yet been discovered are available." At first, everything seemed to be right, but when I substituted the question, "What external standards are needed for statistical rules to move on to meaning decoding," a weak connection was revealed. Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
187140188The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
189141190Further Survey Record 4. Opposite Hypothesis Night
191142192I re-opened the material on the desk and covered the conclusion this time. The place and time were continued in one line, leaving only "water, fountains, and some article signs can be compared by repetition position and context." Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section.
193143194On top of it, the explanation was posted, "Restore the form of Minoan by applying the sound value of the symbol shared with the linear character B in a limited way." At first, everything seemed right, but when I substituted the question, "Can it be considered that the symbols of the same shape made the same sound in the two letters?" a weak connection was revealed. Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
195144196The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
197145198Further Survey Record 5. Distance between record and memory
199146200I re-opened the material on the desk and covered the conclusion this time. The place and time continued in one line, leaving only "a definite bilingual inscription and no long enough narrative text." Unconfirmed sections were not filled by imagination but marked with blank squares. The larger the square, the lower the reliability of the hypothesis to pass through the section.
201147202On top of it, the explanation was posted, "Find the grammar role in the repetition of prefixes, prefixes, and word positions without getting the language right first." At first, everything seemed right, but when I substituted the question, "Is the iteration of the list a word, a quantity unit, or a person's name?" a weak connection was revealed. Hypothesis has to endure the question. If you keep making new coincidences to avoid questions, you will create, not reasoning, from that moment on.
203148204The results obtained in this section are not confirmed criminals or complete plain texts. Instead, it became clear which explanations required fewer assumptions, and what would flip the ranking if found. Even if the case is not completed, the scope of the investigation can be narrowed. This record is intended to leave that very narrow boundary.
· University of Cambridge Repository — Linear A
208152209· SigLA — Linear A inscriptions database
210153211· MUSINT II — Cretan writing documents
212154213※ This article is a commentary in the form of personal survey records based on public records and reliable data. I have distinguished between confirmed facts and my reasoning, and I update my judgment when a new official announcement is made. External material images were edited for some color and composition according to the permitted licensing conditions, and each image source was shown in the caption.