Revised Decipherment of the Hieroglyphs - 255 LexiLine Journal

Revised Decipherment of the Egyptian Hieroglyphs Coming Soon

Shortly I will begin postings on my "Revised Decipherment of the
Egyptian Hieroglyphs". Obviously, the basic "decipherment" of the
Egyptian hieroglyphs was originally made by Champollion, but his
rudimentary work has been nearly blindly followed since by
Egyptologists. This blind following has not been correct and there
are substantial errors found and corrections to be made, showing the
most ancient Egyptian language, i.e. that of the Old Kingdom
Pharaohs who founded Egyptian civilization, to be Indo-European in
origin.

Champollion's Original Decipherment of the Egyptian Hieroglyphs
(helped by the pioneer work of Thomas Young)

We must recall that Champollion derived many of his decipherment
values for the hieroglyphs by making comparisons to the known
language of Coptic, which is viewed as a remnant of ancient
Pharaonic, 5000 years later. Hence, as an example of the kinds of
things I will be correcting, when Champollion set the value of one
of the hieroglyphs at "F" - based on similar words having "F" in
Coptic - this similarity does not mean that the value was
originally "F" in 3000 BC.

The example of "P PF and F" on the basis of High German and Wolynisch

We know from Europe, for example, that simple words such as Pepper
or Pipe changed as as we go south. "Pepper" goes to "Pfeffer" in
Germany and then to "Feffer" as we move southward, or "Pipe" goes
to "Pfeife" in Germany and to "Feife" southward. See here the
comparison of "high German" and "Wolynisch" at
http://snipurl.com/4iik
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/5985/hochdeutsch.wolinisch.html
for numerous such words, some of which are reproduced below:

High German (left) Wolynisch (right)

Pfahl [pfa:l] Fahl [fa:l] (cf. fahl)
Pfähle ["pfE:l@] Fähl [fe:l]/Fähle
pfählen ["pfE:l=n] fählen ["fe:l=n]
Pfau [pfaU] Fau [faU]
Pfeffer ["pfEf6] Feffer ["fEf6]
Pfeffermühlen ["pfEf6my:l=n] Feffermiehlen ["fEf6mi:l=n]
Pfeifer ["pfaIf6] Feifer ["faIf6]
pflücken ["pflYk=n] flicken ["flIk=n]
Pflug [pfu:k] Flug [flu:x]/Fluch [flu:x]
Pfund [pfUnt] Fund [fUnt]

Wolynisch is the language of the Germans who migrated to the Ukraine
starting ca. 1736 A.D. and who retained their language while "F"-
ifying the words beginning with "pf" in "high German", with many of
these same words beginning with "p" further north in Germany.
[See here http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/sampa/german.htm for a
phonetic view of High German.]

Logically, what can happen to German in the space of 300 years - on
the evidence of Wolynisch - can certainly have happened - and DID
happen, as we shall allege, in Egypt as well in the space of
thousands of years. Champollions "F" is simply wrong for the most
ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs where it was closer to a PF and
definitely a V based on the Latvian evidence - for what in German is
PFAHL and Wolynisch FAHL is in Latvian a VĀLe "cudgel, club, post".

We will be showing that words alleged to be F-based in Egyptian
actually are V-based in Latvian, where they have an older meaning
from which we can derive the roots of the words.

That in any case, is one example of the types of changes we shall be
making to revise the decipherment of the hieroglyphs and make them
correct for the Old Kingdom - and what is more important - thereby
we will be showing the origin of the culture, which is not possible
based on the erroneous decipherment used in Egyptology today.

Basic Sources for the "Revised Decipherment" of the Egyptian
Hieroglyphs by Andis Kaulins

1. Jean-François Champollion, Précis du système hiéroglyphique",
Paris, France, 1824.
2. Rainer Hannig, Ägyptisches Wörterbuch I: Alter Reich und Erste
Zwischenzeit, Hannig Lexica 4, Kulturgeschichte der Antiken Welt,
Band 98, Verlag Philipp von Zabern, Mainz am Rhein, Germany (an
absolutely essential source since this is OLD Pharaonic).
3. Christiane Ziegler, "Das Geheimnis ist Gelüftet", pp. 81-109,
Pharaonen-Dämmerung, DNA, Strasbourg, originally published in
French as "Mémoires d'Egypte", Strasbourg, France.
4. Mark Collier and Bill Manley, How to Read Egyptian Hieroglyphs,
British Museum Press, London, England, 1998.
5. Maria Carmela Betrò, Heilige Zeichen, Gustav Lübbe Verlag,
Bergisch Gladbach, Germany, 1996 (originally published
in Italian in 1995 as Geroglifici. 580 Segni per Capire l'Antico
Egitto, Arnoldo Mondadori Editore S.p.A., Mailiand, and now also
available in English as "Hieroglyphics: The Writing of Ancient
Egypt", Abbeville Press, New York, 1996.
6. Gabriele Wenzel, Hieroglyphen: Schreiben und lesen wie die
Pharaonen, nymphenburger - F.A. Herbig, Munich, 2001.
7. Andis Kaulins, Writing Origins: Pharaohs, Moderns, Dyslexics,
online at http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi40.htm

Expressly rejected for our analysis are all the prevailing and most
commonly used - and erroneous - sources for what is called "Middle
Egyptian Grammar". These are unsound and incorrect on their face for
an analysis of Old Kingdom Pharaonic language, dealing with a stage
of Egyptian already representing a kauderwelsch, or mixed bag, of
languages from which no sensible view of the original Pharaonic
language can be made, being confusingly combined with the Arabic and
other local languages of the region. Pharaonic, originally, had
absolutely nothing at all to do with the predecessors of Arabic,
i.e. Aramaic, Cannanite, etc. Rather, Pharaonic is related to
Sumerian and the Northwest Semitic Scripts, and these - as I have
alleged for years - are also Indo-European in origin.

Once we get the words right - then we can begin constituting the
grammar - not before. The linguists have the cart before the horse,
basing their grammars on an improper transliteration of terms.

We will start - fittingly I think - in a couple of days with the
Egyptian word for the "Goddess of Art of Writing" falsely
transliterated by the Egyptologists as
SESCHAT
which has a comparable in the Latvian term
SACERĒT viz. SACERĒTI (that is also the correct Pharaonic
transliteration)
meaning "to write", especially in the sense of "to author, to
compose a writing, to think up that which is written, to put a
thought to paper".

This does not mean that the original Pharaonic Egyptian
was "Latvian" but that both languages share a common Indo-European
origin. Indeed, other similar terms in other Indo-European languages
will surely also be found, which would only be more evidence that
Pharaonic was Indo-European.

As I say, we will start with that term.