Snoring snoring

Symbols rongo rongo.

It is known by the name of rongo rongo (pronunciation in Rapanui: [ˈɾoŋoˈɾoŋo]) to a writing system discovered on Easter Island in the 19th century, carved primarily with obsidian points, mostly on wooden tablets.

The native inhabitants of Easter Island also called it kohau rongo rongo. The common translation of the term kohau is wood used to make the hull of canoes, and rongo rongo is 'great message' or 'great study'. It was also translated as 'recitation lines' or 'reciting staffs'.

There are authors who say that this form of writing is the only structured writing in all of Oceania, although there is still a lack of reliable deciphering to prove it. The symbols or glyphs are carved along grooves made prior to engraving on the artifacts and average 9-14mm in height. They seem to graphically represent figurines of anthropomorphic beings in various postures, other fantasy creatures that resemble birds, plants and other terrestrial and aquatic animals, celestial objects, as well as geometric objects, small fishhooks, among others.

Description

Written tablet.

The signs that make up the texts are mostly well stylized, have almost the same height and are aligned with no apparent division (white spaces or punctuation marks) between them, forming a type of continuous writing, typical of some ancient writing systems, eg ancient texts of Greek literature or certain samples of the Etruscan language. The inscriptions end when some "knot", some natural protrusion or other irregularity (for example, gnawed fragments, burned by fire, ruined by humidity) appears on the surface of the objects or, as is to be expected, when the physical space above them is exhausted. The size and shape of the tables, whose age has yet to be determined exactly, are disparate.

Tablets are said to be read from the first line in the left corner of the recto and continue linearly to the end of the line and then flip it over to move on to the next line. (However, the text inscribed on top of the Staff of Santiago is an exception.) However, it is not quite clear if all the tablets contain a document of a unitary nature or if any of them could serve as a deposit or collection of different documents, so the reading starting point is a pending matter. Observing the fragmentation of the text into uneven sequences, there is reason to believe that some tablets retain that function. Fischer says that the Mamari tablet has the appearance of being a chain of several sequences of different classes. Apparently, Fischer was right, because when structurally analyzing the C text, called the "Mamari tablet", groups of sequences are observed that are repeated on both sides of the artifact. These different sequences, composed to a greater degree of identical or similar elements, could testify in favor of «lists», «refrains» or «formulas», so rooted and common in the ancient folklore of Rapanui. Several scholars report the possibility of lists included in various rongo-rongo objects considering delimiting glyphs with no phonetic value of the type 380.1 (3/52), see Barthel (1958), Horley (2007: 28). For example, these glyphs would indicate the beginning or the end of pagan prayers related to magical practices, destined to capture prisoners of war and possibly to process revenge and death to the criminals; There would also be no lack of toponymic or onomastic sequences inserted between said delimiters. It is expected that the rongo-rongo glyphs arranged and embedded in such sequential groups reflect part of pre-Christian Easter Island culture. It would be unreasonable to think that the scribe wasted talent, precious and scarce material —wood— and time to engrave a gibberish of symbols and similar nonsense on the surface of the 'Mamari' tablet.

Writing analysis, possibly a calendar.

When Jacques B.M. Guy comments on three tablets, the one of 'Great Santiago' (Text H), that of 'Greater Leningrad' (Text P) and 'Little Leningrad' (Text Q), which he considers to convey "almost exactly the same hieroglyphic text", and compares them with the content of the Tahua tablet (Text A or 'the Remo'), notes that it has the appearance of being '' a compilation, as a collection of abbreviated texts, already lost, except for its beginning, found in those other three tablets''

Sign sequence.

We mention again that the material used for the engraving of the rongo-rongo signs, the support in other words, is wood. The choice of support is commonly established by the material resources that the natural perimeter can offer to the native scribes. In the case of the ancient Rapanui, most of the carved signs appear on wood, and to a lesser extent on rock material, such as petroglyphs, and possibly on the bones of large fish and marine mammals. If the scribes had engraved on other perishable materials such as gourds or leather, it is expected that with the passage of time, the 'texts' that came there would have been destroyed. In the case of durable supports, such as hard wood or stone, the probability of survival is greater; however, the atmospheric and physical conditions of the environment combined with the violence exerted by humans, are sovereignly determining. In addition, it will be necessary to remember that the support conditions the shape of the signs. Therefore, the solidity and texture of the firewood fibers would condition to a certain extent the simplification or morphological sophistication of the rongo-rongo signs incised on the tablets. The material in which the glyphs have been engraved belongs to several native or foreign tree species. Among the native trees, we could mention the toromiro (Sophora toromiro) , the makoi (Thespesia populnea) , the hau (Triumfetta semitriloba) and sandalwood (Santalum) . Thus, Métraux (1940:17) commented that "the wood of one of the tablets [rongorongo] in the Museum of Folk Art in Vienna (22869) has been analyzed and recognized as Thespesia populnea." In the case of 'foreign' material, this is understandable, if we take into account the scarcity of afforestation on the island of Rapanui, especially in a relatively late period of its history. The inhabitants randomly collected floating pieces of driftwood to be able to inscribe them and continue the tradition.

First document rongo rongo known. Signature of the rapanui chiefs of the annexation of the Easter Island to the Spanish Crown, with certain characters according to their styleNovember 20, 1770.

For some researchers, these signs or glyphs seem to demonstrate the existence, in the past, of a form of writing, apparently with no similar precedent in all of Polynesia. However, in Oceania there is the case of the document of the "Treaty of Waitangi" (Treaty of Waitangi, in English) of 1840 signed by representatives of the English monarchy and a group of Maori tribal chiefs, who surprised those present with "series symbols" 1935), thus describing the possibility of an emblematic script among the natives (see Métraux 1940:400). There is also some controversy as to whether the Rapa Nui script arose independently —ex novo— as in the case of Chinese or Sumerian, or the idea of the script was taken over after contact with European explorers., precisely after the visit of the ship San Lorenzo and the frigate Santa Rosalía, of the Royal Spanish Navy, in November 1770. During that Spanish expedition, known as the González Expedition After Haedo, the Spaniards took possession of Easter Island, naming it isla de San Carlos, after agreeing it with several indigenous chiefs, who signed the corresponding act with "certain characters according to their style", in what which was the first known document in which the writing rongo-rongo appears.

Example of writing.

It is often theorized that the rongo rongo signs could be indicators of a logographic-phonetic system, in which each sign or group of signs could represent proper names of caciques and their descendants, different war or economic activities or other concepts related to the Easter cosmogony, etc. The characters are engraved in parallel horizontal lines. One of the properties of this script is that they are inscriptions in "reverse bustrophedon": while on one line the signs are in a normal position, on the next they are inverted with respect to the previous line so that, to read a tablet, this should be reversed each time a new line is started. Although it is unknown what these symbols mean, several attempts have been made to decode the carving.

Botanical identification and age

The French scholar and publicist Catherine Orliac, from the Center National de la Recherche Scientifique (in Paris), published in 2005 in the magazine Archaeology in Oceania 40:3, the article «The rongorongo tablets from Easter Island: botanical identification and 14-C dating» (translation: 'the rongorongo tablets of Easter Island: botanical identification and radiocarbon test'), whose meaning is directly linked to one of the most controversial issues of the rongo rongo phenomenon: the age of the entries. Some results of his work and the dating carried out in a Miami laboratory made it known that the wood of the small tablet from Saint Petersburg is dated: 1680-1740, with the method of analysis of the fibers and circles in the wood and not of carbon. 14). This seems to favor the opinion that the inscriptions precede the visit of the Spanish in 1770, although on the other hand they are undermined by the author's accessibility to all the documents disseminated by various museums in the world. Thus, and much to the chagrin of the scholars, only one of them, the Q text, was analyzed using the C-14 test, making it impossible to draw weighty conclusions that could be obtained by analyzing more manuscripts from the corpus.

Six tablets and one reimiro (decorative pectoral) engraved with 44 glyphs, for example, texts G and H, B and C, text Q, texts K and L, the last being the reimiro, were identified as incised on wood of Thespesia populnea, Malváceas family, known in Rapanui under the name makoi. These results are partly in agreement with the artifact material, and on the other hand, they seem to support what was said by Métraux (1940:17) when he says that "the tree is frequently alluded to in legends and songs" (This tree is frequently alluded to in legend and songs) .

Thespesia populnea, the tree-rose of Oceania, when young it has a slight pink coloration and when it gets old it becomes dark reddish with purple flashes. It can reach a maximum height of 15 meters and according to the scholar Zizka (1991:20, 51), cited by Orliac, it was brought to Rapanui by the first Polynesian settlers in the VIII century. . Lavachery says about this tree that it is light, without consistency, and equally small in size.

Examining the width of the tablets to determine if they were engraved in the cross section of a branch or a trunk of Thespesia populnea, also did not allow the author to reach a conclusion. The exception seems to be the Mamari tablet, which shows some traces of sap vessels, thus indicating that it was incised in the cut of a 19.5 cm diameter trunk, corresponding to a 15 m tall tree grown. This discovery raises questions about the age of said tablet and, in a broader context, about the age of the rongo rongo script. The first European navigators, Roggeveen (1722), González (1770), Cook (1774) and La Perouse (1786), do not mention any vegetation of that height in their reports, but seem to agree on the absence of large trees on the surface of Rapa Nui. That could tell us that Mamari would have been recorded before the disappearance of the forest that once covered the island, documented by carbon analysis to have occurred in the first half of the century XVII.

The spectrometric analysis of 20 mg of wood extracted from the object on which the Q text is inscribed, aka the 'Little St. Petersburg' tablet, for whatever reason, gave varied readings: a) 1680-1740, b) 1800-1930 and c) 1950-1960. Two of the author's observations should be included here: a) the life expectancy of Thespesia... reaches a maximum of 80 years and b) the state of conservation of the tree in tropical regions is not optimal due to the medium density of the trunk; therefore the propensity to the action of the elements is very high. Métraux (1940:393) also wonders if the tablets were really very old if they could have withstood the physical conditions in which they were kept. «The wooden tablets could not have been kept for centuries in rain-drenched, thatched huts, or in caves», or in caves']. In such circumstances, rongo-rongo objects, only in excellent conditions of conservation, similar perhaps to those of a modern museum, could enjoy a long or very long life. Another argument offered by Orliac regarding the antiquity of Mamari is the presence of the sign 067, called in the Rapanui language “niu” which actually means 'coconut nut' and which could be associated with the tree Paschalococcos disperta, naunau opata in vernacular name, a species of palm tree that has a somewhat swollen trunk like a bottle, related to Jubaea chilensis. The design had to be carried out at a time when the palm tree was still present on the island and was in full view of the inhabitants. On the other hand, no one knows for sure if said sign is pictographically related to the palm tree, if it represents a completely different entity from botany, or if it implies a whole syllable or word in the Rapanui language.

The only certainty of this work, which contains a detailed xylological analysis, is the identification of Thespesia populnea as the material used for the inscriptions. As for the age, after the radiocarbon test, what Orliac said is disconcerting, «In fact, there is no irrefutable argument enabling one to claim that the small St Petersburg tablet dates to the end of 17th century or the beginning of the 18th, rather than the 19th century'.

History

The rongorongo script was known by the so-called tangata rongo rongo or Maori rongo rongo, people well trained in their singing and reading. Some of the hypotheses proposed propose that the signs inscribed on the tablets served as an aid, as a memoria technica in the style of the pallares of the confederated Moche tribes of Peru (Larco Hoyle 2001 [1938]), of the embroidered wampum belts of the Iroquois Amerindians, the caurí shells of the Yoruba of Nigeria, etc., to store and remember religious songs, traditions and genealogies. Knowledge of the true meaning of the inscriptions was lost when slavers from Peru took from Rapa Nui, between 1862 and 1863, a large part of the men of working age for the drudgery of extracting and exploiting guano in the Chincha Islands of Peru. However, their final destiny seems to have been that of braceros and serfs working for the Peruvian landowners on the mainland. Among them, presumably, were the tuhunga tā, the experts versed in the wise tradition of Kohau rongo-rongo and when they died far from their ancestral land, their knowledge seems to have been irretrievably lost. In parallel, Father Sebastián Englert (1948) has commented "this knowledge has gone down to the grave with the tangata manu, wise men in ancient science."

Connoisseurs in the matter say that there are a total of twenty-five authentic wooden objects left, preserved in various museums around the world, plus a reproduction of a destroyed object, which contain rongo rongo signs: fourteen complete tablets, nine tablet fragments, two reimiros (decorative pectorals), one being the so-called "reimiro de Londres 9295", text L with some 44 incised glyphs and the other, a reimiro of a compound sign (a diglyph), known as the Reimiro de Londres 6847, text J, a cacique's staff, the Bastón de Santiago (aka, the Santiago Staff) that contains the largest number of carved glyphs, almost 2,320 of them (according to Fischer 1997) and a statuette carved in wood, known as a tangata manu, the bird-man. However, it is known that there were many more inscriptions because the first missionary on Rapa Nui, Brother Eugène Eyraud (1820-1868), described the existence of hundreds of engraved tablets and staves in a report sent to his superior in December 1864.

«Dans toutes les cases on trouve des tablettes de bois ou des bâtons couverts de plusieurs espèces de caracters hiéroglyphiques: ce sont des figures d'animaux inconnues dans l'île, que les indigènes tracent au moyen de pierres tranchantes» [translation: “In all the huts are found wooden tablets or sticks covered with many kinds of hieroglyphic characters: those are figures of animals unknown on the island that the natives engrave with sharp stones (obsidian points)'].

The Easter Islanders, decimated by disease and slavery (at the end of the XIX century there were only about 200 natives left in the island), gave the tablets magical powers, both beneficial and evil, but some missionaries, considering them 'satanic', managed to convince a good part of their owners to use them as fuel for heating or to dispose of them in other ways. Others simply rotted in the caves where they were hidden. Currently, the probability of finding an authentic rongorongo tablet is practically nil. The original objects preserved in the museums are of incalculable value and a source of primary importance for the probable decipherment of this unique writing system in the world.

Attempts to understand and decipher the Kohau RongoRongo

In theory, every script conceived by humans could be clarified by other humans. However, things are not so easy, since the decipherment of a writing system does not require only talent, deep knowledge, dedication and mere luck. When dealing with the "Kohau RongoRongo", the problem is completely thorny due to factors of an objective nature. The reasons that influence affirming the above are:

1. For now, the number of legitimate ‘Kohau RongoRongo’ documents is exiguous, unless they appear more than fortuitously others. In the absence of a relevant corpus, the complete repertoire of the kohau rongo rongo signs and the standard variety of the Rapanui written—if there was one—, indispensable for coherent investigation and understanding, cannot be known with certainty. Documentary insufficiency can also reduce opportunities for viable decipherment as independent studies and checks are needed to validate the different working hypotheses.
2. The absence of bilingual texts. Given the apparent insulation in which that form of writing was developed, it is unthinkable to find a bitext or tritext on the guise of a ‘Piedra de Rosetta’.
3. The lack of knowledge of the history of the evolution of the graphic signs further compromises that task. It is very possible that the rapanui language has changed and been contaminated over the years, while the written form has stagnated in a certain segment of the time, resulting in an intricate discrepancy.
4. The above circumstances lead to the following: it will be forced to submit to detailed structural examination the existing texts; to offer an expositive explanation on how to better categorize and fraction the signs, based on their contextual presence and not on their design form; to consult with caution all the authentic materials concerning their decipherment; the revelation of the meaning of the ‘Kohau RongoRongo’ seems to be going to do little,

Various attempts to decipher the meaning of the kohau rongo rongo

Over the course of 140 years, the rongo rongo kohau has been the subject of intense research, as well as the subject of heated debate by many people, both with a solid academic background (linguistic, epigraphic, ethnological and anthropological), and from people fond of riddles and with a particularly high imagination, prone to rash judgments and outlandish explanations of the most varied. Bearing in mind the history of research and disputes related to the meaning of kohau rongo rongo, it is to be expected that serious discussions, as well as nondescript and minor ones, will continue to exist in the near future as well. Many of the interpreters, decipherers and scholars seem and are inclined to constantly disagree with regard to the methodology and the concrete meaning of the rongo rongo signs. It seems that, as in other cases of successful decipherments (the ancient Egyptian, the Linear B, the Maya) or in the cases of decipherments not yet successful (the Etruscan, the Linear A, the Indus script, the Meroitic, the Disc of Phaistos), disputes and rivalry are an indispensable part of the process.

For now, it is estimated that the discrete task of understanding the inscriptions of the Kohau Rongo Rongo is beyond the attempts made to date, although inversely one could predict with some optimism that the various serious works will tend to contribute gradually and in the long run. to your understanding.

Below, there is an incomplete list that includes the people who have contributed to various studies, aimed primarily at clarifying and deciphering the rongo rongo phenomenon.

Eugène Eyraud, the first to warn about the Rongorongo

Eugène Eyraud lived only forty-eight years (1820-1868) and yet his name is historically linked to the information he gave the world about the existence of rongorongo objects. it is recorded in the letter he sent in December 1864 to the superior of the religious order of which he was a part. Lay Brother Eyraud arrived on Easter Island at the beginning of January 1864, sent by the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary (SS.CC). Due to the spite of the inhabitants, the evangelizing work did not bear as much fruit as he had hoped, and he was forced to leave the island in nine months. He returned later in the company of Father Hippolyte Roussel to extend the Christian mission. He succumbed to tuberculosis in 1868. The hundreds of rongo rongo objects, on which he attests, show the existence of an ancient tradition still lasting, despite the devastating effects of the raids of the Peruvian slavers, smallpox and other diseases brought by returnees from Easter Island and domestic wars between the tribes. Bearing in mind the scarcity of wood in those years in Rapanui, the hundreds of rongorongo objects mentioned —tablets, canes, staffs, etc.— by Eyraud, point towards two possibilities, a) their antiquity when the island was still covered with well-grown native trees, providing the material for carving or engraving, b) the haphazard exploitation of abandoned and/or strayed wood by whalers, scientific research vessels, liner and shipping vessels the military ships that used to visit Easter Island at that time (18th-19th centuries). All that ethnographic and linguistic wealth would be reduced in just two-three years in two dozen objects that represent the current Rongorongo corpus.

Bishop Etienne “Tepano” Jaussen

In the annals of the decipherment of the rongo rongo, Monsignor Jaussen is listed as the first known sage who tried to discover the meaning behind its signs. In 1871 the bishop compiled 'the meaning' of many of the signs in a private notebook. To do this, he based himself on the reading of a Rapanui native who was then working as a day laborer in Tahiti, named Metoro Tau'a Ure, who sang in his presence the supposed content of four tablets. The tablets recited were those of Aruku-Kurenga, Tahua, Mamari and Keiti, which the bishop had previously had in his possession. After consulting the result of the "translations", Jaussen was somewhat disappointed since they seemed to allude to the external form of the signs in the best of cases. Regarding Metoro's readings before Bishop Jaussen, the Swiss scholar Alfred Métraux (1940:396) stated that they were “merely explanatory” [translation: 'merely explanatory'] but that they « nevertheless useful for it gives the meaning of designs, the significance of which might otherwise be a puzzle» enigma'] (1940: 397). Similarly, Facchetti (2002:202) is of the opinion that «Metoro sapeva (in molti casi) riconoscere esatmente l'oggetto raffigurato, ma non era più in grado di dedurne la funzione nel preciso contesto, leggendo tutti i segni come se fossero logogrammi (segni-parola)» [translation: 'Metoro knew (in many cases) exactly how to recognize the configured object, but was not able to deduce the function in the precise context, reading all the signs as if they were logograms (word-signs)'].

It could also be assumed that Metoro lacked the predisposition to reveal the message enclosed in them or "what was translated" could simply be gossip without substance, in the worst case. Metoro's proficiency in the art of rongo rongo kohau singing left much to be desired. Even today, such readings could lead one into delusions that would have to be supported by indisputable evidence or into a tortuous dead end if extreme caution is not exercised when seeking their advice.

Dr. A. Carroll

Another decipherment that can undoubtedly be considered insecure and unsuccessful is the one carried out by the Australian Allen Carroll, a surgeon by profession. In 1892, he published in the Journal of the Polynesian Society the study "The Easter Island inscriptions, and the translation and interpretation of them". ') in which he offered an alleged translation taking as reference the Quechua language of the Incas. The 'translation' It involved wacky and adventurous elements in that he presented no list contrasting the individual kohau rongo rongo signs with their actual meaning, nor their phonetic values, and no explanation as to how he came to decode them.

Charles de Harlez

The Belgian scholar and professor at the University of Louvain Charles Joseph de Harlez de Deulin (1832-1899) devoted his attention to the problem of rongo rongo in his book L'île de Pâques et ses monuments graphiques (1895) [Easter Island and its graphic monuments] in which he conceived the signs as representing hieroglyphic writing in the style of Maya glyphs and Chinese characters from the Shang, Zhou or Dongba dynasties. His opinion, although not exaggerated, was subjected to a careful and rather reserved examination by the specialists of the time.

Ormonde Maddock Dalton

The panorama of rongorongo research would not be complete without reference to an original article, written in 1904 by the British Ormonde Maddock Dalton (1866-1945). The essay entitled “ About an Inscribed Wooden Tablet from Easter Island” was published by the monthly magazine “MAN,” of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland.

Keeping in mind a fair number of fantasies and falsehoods written about the nature of writing and the content of inscriptions over more than a century, one is left to admire O. M. Dalton's stark style to the time to offer details that, although brief, are correct and conducive to scientific analysis.

We summarized some of the details after the inspection carried out by O.M. Dalton of the 'London Tablet': 1. Scribes used even the beveled edges of the tablets to make incisions due to the scarcity of wood. 2. Essays written on the subject of rongorongo are located in different publications, sometimes difficult to access. 3. The level of stylization of the signs is such that one wonders how rongorongo arose in such a lonely and isolated place on the planet, i. and. in Rapa Nui. 4. The tablets have their reading starting point in the lower left corner. 5. The parallel grooves, carved on the surface of the wooden tablets, served to protect the signs of wear. 6. Recognizes the presence of real and abstract elements in the inventory of the glyphs, suggesting their "ideographic" nature. He agrees with the presence of formulas, sentences, genealogies and simple legends in the body of texts and defends the indigenous Polynesian character of the writing. 7. Supports the hypothesis of the existence of a genealogical series in the 'Small Tablet of Santiago' (1904: 3-4), previously proposed by J. Park Harrison in 1874. Said series was re-interpreted in 1956 [1957] by the Russians N. Butinov and Y. Knorozov as a patronymic sequence, the conclusion perhaps being very close to the truth. 8. He criticizes the deciphering of Dr. A. Carroll who found an amalgamation of words and phrases from American languages on the tablets, such as Toltec, Quiché and Muisca. 9. He is not oblivious to the possibility that certain rock carvings are similar to rongorongo signs, e.g. eg the sign of the frigate bird /600/, aka MakeMake. 10. Recommends caution when referring to Metoro chants and Ure Vae Iko performances and supports the use of available full-body photographs of RR and frequency analysis of individual signs or groups of signs.

Katherine Routledge

English anthropologist and archaeologist (1866-1935) who undertook in the company of her husband William Scoresby Routledge a scientific expedition to Rapanui, in order to study, catalog and gather in a compendium, the art, the native customs and the ' writing' rongo rongo of the old Easter.

During the years 1914-15 she managed to interview two elderly informants, one being a leper named Tomenika and the other a man named Kapiera, who supposedly had some knowledge of the signs. The interviews, despite her good will and tenacity, were not very fruitful because of the apparent contradictions in the words of the informants.

Even so, Routledge determined that the rongo rongo were conceived as litanies or repeated descriptions since their priest-scribes aesthetically enjoyed them when they were sung. In his opinion, once the data collection was finished, the rongo rongo kohau were a tool to be able to awaken in the memory images and sentences related to the folklore of the ancient islanders. In other words, like the beads in a rosary or the knots in a handkerchief, the signs in question helped a particular person – and not just anyone – to memorize events and stories of yesteryear. “No detailed systematic study of the tablets has as yet been possible from the point of view of the Expedition, but it seems at present probable that the system was one of memory, and that the signs were simply aids to collection, or for keeping count like the beads of a rosary”. the system [of writing] was mnemonic, and that the signs came merely to collect, or to keep count as in the beads of a rosary.”] In another paragraph, Routledge reiterates his idea, saying: “ Given, therefore, that it was desired to remember lists of words, whether categories of names or correct forms of prayer, the repetition would be a labor of love, and to draw figures as aids to recollection would be very natural”. [Trans: “Therefore, since it was desired to remember lists of words, they were c categories of names or correct forms of sentences, repetition would be for art's sake, and drawing little figurines to aid collection would be quite natural."] In 1919, Katherine Routledge published the results of her research in a book entitled "The Mystery of Easter Island: The Story of an Expedition''.

Some researchers present who favor the mixed logographic-phonetic nature hidden behind the glyphs, believe that their hypothesis is hasty and needs to be thoroughly revised.

John McMillan Brown and the “Pathographic” Writing Hypothesis

John McMillan Brown published the book The Riddle of Pacific in 1924 [1979] as a result of a five-month stay on Easter Island and as a result of personal observations of many years regarding their culture. In his work there is an entire chapter, pp. 79-96, dedicated to the “Escritura” rongorongo. Professor Brown is somewhat known in academic linguistic and ethnographic circles for the discovery on the island of Woleai, North Carolina. West, in 1913, of an unknown, notably syllabic script used by a chief or cacique named Egilimar (McMillan Brown 1979 [1924]:84) (Riesenberg and Kaneshiro 1960:273-275).

His description of the rongo rongo, like the rest of the cultural manifestations of Easter Island, is original, fickle and variegated and arouses justified curiosity. In summary, his points of view about the indigenous “writing” would correspond to the following: a) the geographical isolation, the average size of the island and the constant internal hostilities would be reasons for one did not perceive the need for a writing like those that occurred in other lands and dynastic institutions, for example in Egypt or Mesopotamia, b) the Polynesian tradition is full of mnemonic systems in which quantities of rations and food units were recorded, lengthy prayers, long lists of divinities and ancestors, endless legends and traditions, many of them imbued with a dark and metaphorical language, therefore demanding an enormous memory, c) based on the frequent patterns of “komari” (sign 050 according to Barthel 1958) and of the multiple forms assumed by Make-Make, the supreme god of the natives, is inclined to urge “ sexuality,” and the belief that the tablets served as means to aid “conception” and fertility, as well as the idea of power and authority on said island, reminiscent of a submerged and submerged ancient Polynesian “empire” swallowed by the waves of the Pacific, d) reviews the failed decipherment attempts, e) reproduces the corpus of two important manuscripts already made by Rudolf Philippi, the director of the Santiago de Chili Museum, and f) concludes that rongo rongo was related with a priestly code used strictly by priests for ceremonial purposes. In this context, he continues to tell us that it was a memory system that aroused ideas of prayers, hymns or spells, referring to the " perpetual repetition " of the figure of Make-Make . Therefore, that mystical and sacred symbol would provoke religious emotions more than assembled ideas and that the writing would be more “pathographic” (which fosters pathos) than “ideographic. ”

It is interesting to remember here how many of his ideas (some well exaggerated) are still being debated among contemporary scholars.

Vilmos (Guillaume de) Hevesy

In 1932 the Hungarian Vilmos (Guillaume de) Hevesy noticed a certain formal resemblance between some rongo rongo signs and those of the hypothetical writing system of the Indus Valley (Mohenjo-dāro, Sind, Harappā, Panjāb). In his time, this resemblance even came to attract the attention of the noted French orientalist Paul Pelliot (1878-1945), who read during a lecture before the French Academy of Inscriptions and Calligraphy in 1932, "Note sur les hiéroglyphes de l'Ile de Pâques» ('notes on the hieroglyphics of Easter Island'), the same article written by de Hevesy.

It is worth mentioning that today this apparent correlation has been discarded by many researchers (Métraux, Guy, Fischer, Facchetti, Parpola, Sproat, Robinson) and has become something anecdotal in history of the archaeological decipherment of the kohau rongo rongo. Considering the geographical distance and the time factor that separate the graphic or pictographic symbols of the Indus 'writing' and the signs of the Kohau rongo rongo of Rapa Nui, it is very difficult, if not vain, to establish a significant connection between the two, more beyond their appearances.

Above all, how and on what scientific basis can two supposed writings that still remain undeciphered be compared? In the case of the Indus Valley 'script' (aka Proto-Indic), it is still unknown to which linguistic family and to which substratum it belongs... so the formal coincidences between them, however interesting they may be, are unjustified.

Father Sebastian Englert

Father Sebastián Englert (1888-1969) is a somewhat peculiar case in the history of Rapa Nui and the kohau rongo rongo. Bavarian by birth, he entered the Capuchin order of Franciscan friars and in 1935 came to Easter Island to serve in his parish. Although without the pertinent education in anthropology and linguistics, his work is valued by a large part of the scientific community for his curiosity, his passion, and his skill in the Rapanui language. Among the most important, we could mention La Tierra de Hotu Matu'a from 1940, where old Easter legends and other interesting comments come together and the Island at the Center of the World ['island in the center of the world'] published in 1970 with a ten-page chapter on 'inscribed tablets'. Englert described rongo rongo as "a great mystery of the island" (1948) and his position can be summarized in the following points: 1. he was pessimistic regarding its decipherment due to the minimum number of authentic inscriptions 2. without knowledge of the original Rapanui language, that is, the proto-rapanui, already lost, it would be foolish to seek information from the tablets and 3. that there were no relevant historical facts on them. It should also be mentioned that the Father did not carry out any structural analysis of the texts and that he personally favored the idea of the absence of sounds behind the signs.

In his honor, the Padre Sebastián Englert Anthropological Museum has been built on the island to evoke and protect the rich cultural heritage of the Rapanui people.

Alfred Metraux

Renowned Swiss ethnographer, anthropologist, and professor (1902-1963) who conducted research on native South Americans on several occasions in his lifetime. In 1934, together with the Belgian archaeologist Henry Lavachery, he embarked on an expedition to the island of Rapanui to closely study their culture and ethnography and also check whether the hypothesis of the Hungarian from Hevesy about the alleged link between the 'writings' of the Indus Valley and from Rapa Nui, it was correct and valid.

After applying an analytical method, counting the rongo rongo symbols and studying their combinations , (1939) concluded that “If the symbols represented sounds, the same signs would have been combined in the same order whenever a word was repeated. But this seldom happens. The same combinations of the same symbols recur in only very few cases. The individual designs are repeated over and over again but apparently in haphazard order. No clue to a script came from this study.” [Trad: “If symbols represented sounds, the same signs would have been combined in the same order when a word was repeated. But that hardly happens. The same combinations of the same symbols occur only in very few cases. The individual designs are repeated and repeated seemingly in a careless manner. This study did not provide any key to the writing.”]

Then, he proposed that the tablets served as a mnemonic device, but that later the natives forgot their specific meaning and were merely considered as simple ornaments or magical symbols.” The idea that the rongo rongo are a kind of mnemonic code that allows recording information about the traditions and rituals of the ancient Rapanuis, was supported in the second decade of the century XX by British anthropologist Katherine Routledge. It must be said that in a certain way, it is possible that Métraux was influenced or inspired in his time by Routledge's proposition.

Since hard evidence is still lacking regarding the true nature of the Kohau Rongo Rongo, his idea, while significant, does not come to his benefit at the moment. Your intuition would have to be demonstrated and justified by compelling evidence for or against you. One feels compelled to suggest that the 'slippery' ground on which current examinations and studies on the Kohau Rongo Rongo take place, allows neither confirming nor refuting what Métraux said.

Later, without his hypothesis serving as an impediment and seeing the work of Russian authors Knorozov and Butinov (1957) regarding a sequence comprising a short patronymic list of local Rapanui 'aristocrats', Métraux seems to have retracted his original position, in favor of kohau rongo rongo as "a proper writing system".

José Imbelloni

José Imbelloni.

José Imbelloni (1885-1967), Italian-Argentine anthropology professor and researcher, has contributed to the study of the rongorongo with “Las `Tablillas parlantes' of Easter, monuments of an Indo-Oceanic graphic system” published in 1951. The most positive aspects of his long essay could be summed up in the description of the inscribed tablets, in noting allomorphs (variants) in the signs when analyzing the texts, downplaying their basic meaning, in observing a language of gesture in some of the glyphs, in commenting on the attempted translations and pointing out faults and weaknesses that characterized some models, while precisely emphasizing the combinatory method, or the contextual and structural analysis of the rongorongo signs. Unable to escape the propaganda aroused by De Hevesy (1932) regarding the origin of the rongorongo of the Indus Valley, Imbelloni devotes considerable time to that theory in the following pages of his work. After alluding to various aspects and finding evidence that today lacks scientific value, he ends up mentioning that rongo rongo was a spelling belonging to the immense Indo-Oceanic area.

Thomas S. Barthel

German epigrapher and ethnographer Thomas S. Barthel is arguably one of the most prominent figures in the history of rongo rongo decipherment. In 1958 Grundlagen zur Entzifferung der Osterinselschrift (Fundamentals for the decipherment of the Easter Island script) was published, his fundamental work, in which Barthel recorded the signs in a system of nomenclature, described the properties of the glyphs and tried to achieve a feasible decipherment...

It must be said that Barthel's deciphering technique was based on the description of the external shape of the glyphs, making numerous references to Rapanui rituals and mythology, and not on the basis of a solid contextual analysis, nor a comparative one. Essentially, Barthel established 'mythological associations' without offering explicit evidence about how to get a phonetic value for the signs in question. Apparently, that shortcoming has to do with the fact that Barthel took the aforementioned “Jaussen List” as his point of reference.

Despite the metaphorical optics, Thomas S. Barthel's “Fundamentals…” represents a notable milestone for all would-be codebreakers, due to its heuristic value in discovering the meaning of codewords. rongo rongo signs. Barthel's (1958) catalog of signs is still used by researchers, although some of its ambiguous features are being slightly improved or continually replaced by conscious researchers around the world.

Barthel's research, which led him to a number of conclusions regarding ancient Easter writing, could be summarized in the following points:

1. Writing does not belong, typologically speaking, to a mere pictography in the way of the Ojibwa or Cuna tribes. The composition is linked to certain conventions and rules known in advance by the scribes, although on the other hand it seems that they enjoyed freedom when applying their artistic prerogative during registration.
2. The core of the writing consists of about 120 glyphs that can be recombined to originate between about 1500-2000 compositions, by ligatures and mergers.
3. In some of the glyphs there is a living expression giving them a character of pantomime and gesticulator. On the other hand, other signs, especially those of geometric nature have acquired a degree of stylization and abstraction.
4. The logograms occupy an eminent place in writing, being linked to a certain content. The logograms do not have a fixed sense, and in many cases a semantic multiplicity is given.
5. Metaphoric character and “poetic circles” (Barthel 1956:235) of the ancient rapanui language also appear in writing.
6. The use of the rebus principle, for example, “the sign for the great double ceremonial row ao, it is used... for the concepts of “domain” or “victory,” cf. (Barthel 1956) .
7. The rongorongo It lacks the ability to reproduce full spoken phrases, unlike today's Spanish. Oral traditions are reduced to a kind of “Telegraph style” testifying that such writing hardly emerged as an incipient form. For example, instead of saying “Man went to the coast to catch octopus” could be recorded on the tablets “Mans of octopus coast catch. ”
8. The principle according to which rongorongo It works. “partial phonetic design”. Since the texts are condensed and characterized by extreme syntactic simplicity, that makes it difficult to understand, but not impossible.
9. Most of the registered objects are recurrently praised for deities, “ritual practices” while some texts contain “bibliographic records. ”

Miguel Ordóñez Cadena

He was the Colombian researcher who, after 20 years of study, revealed the ideographic key that allowed him to translate the writings, publishing a book "An Interpretive Theory of Easter Writing". By making the results of his research known, they were welcomed by the British Museum in London, the Bishop Musseum in Honolulu and the Museum of Man in Paris, of which he was a full member.

He presented his work at the First Easter Island and Eastern Polynesia International Congress in Hanga Roa, Easter Island, in 1984.

The “Russian School”

Boris Kudryavtsev

The most productive “Russian School” seems to have traced the earlier work of Mikluho-Makhlai (1846-1936), the great Russian explorer and multifaceted. In the summer of 1940, the young Boris Kudryavtsev, together with two of his friends, during a school visit to the Leningrad Museum (now Saint Petersburg), came to distinguish some passages that were repeated in a more or less identical way on four different tablets., in those of "Tahua", that of "Greater Saint Petersburg", that of "Little Saint Petersburg" and that of "Greater Santiago".

The importance of this discovery in relation to these shared groups of signs has to do with the underlying language and its possible morpho-syntactic structure that could assist in the deciphering task. In this way, the variations in the sequences noted or in some of the signs suggest that the Rapanui scribes, apart from following certain "syntactic" rules when making incisions on the tablets, perhaps experimented with their inventiveness and personal style in the kohau rongo rongo calligraphy, rejecting the idea of a mechanical alignment and transposition of symbols from one tablet to another/s. If we accept the hypothesis that the Kohau rongo rongo script is a mixed logographic-phonetic system, the patterns in question with slightly different orthography could point to a language modeled after a derivational or inflectional morphology, giving attesting to productive rules, or pointing to a language of syntactic structure, attesting to a particular word order.

However, the evolutionary history of glyph design in extant Kohau Rongo Rongo texts is still obscure and the dividing lines between sign series are blurred. That makes one be quite careful about the above, at least until indisputable proof of translation of rongo rongo documents is offered — in the future.

Kudryavtsev's observations were published in 1947 by his academic guide, D. A. Olderogge, who opined that rongo rongo resembled “the Egyptian hieroglyphic writing system at an early stage” of development (Robinson 2002:231).

Yuri Knorozov and Nikolai Butinov

Researchers Yuri Knorozov and Nikolai Butinov published in 1956 in the magazine “Soviet Ethnography” an insightful article about a sequence of signs that appears in two lines of the verso of the “Little Santiago” tablet that was segmented into smaller groups.

Six of these groups are divided with the ‘anthropomorphic’ sign 200 (according to the catalog of Barthel, 1958) as a “separator”. Referring to Jaussen's papers on such common patterns in Rapanui tradition, they sensibly suggested a possible genealogy in the form of a patronym (family name inherited from father), verbatim: King A, father of B / / King B, father of C // King C, father of D// King D. or conversely, King D // D, son of King C // C, son of King B // B, son of King A //.

Irina Fedorova

She is a St. Petersburg-based linguist whose ongoing goal has been the reconstruction of “the ancient Rapanui language”, according to which the rongo rongo inscriptions have allegedly been composed. Fedorova's specific goal has been to establish a direct link between the language and a sequence in the Kohau rongo rongo texts. If this works, it can be assumed that it will be as impressive as Michael Ventris's abstract work when it comes to assign phonetic values to the signs of the “Linear B” writing system.

Konstantin Pozdniakov

Pozdniakov, a linguist and specialist in African languages based in Paris, has contributed to the studies on rongo rongo with a unique article: «Les bases du déchiffrement de l'écriture de l'île de Pâques» (The bases of the decipherment of the Easter Island script), published in 1996 in Journal de la Société des Océanistes (magazine of the society of oceanists). He claims to have identified a nucleus of signs (some 120 basic signs [1996: 301]) already mentioned by Barthel (in 1958), which could be further simplified or broken down to probably reach half of them, about 60 in other words.. This number seems to agree with that of a pure “syllabary” and, as a consequence, would enable us to find syllabic elements in the rongo rongo texts, similar to the Japanese 'Hiragana'. The positive of his research is a statistical analysis to find a correlation between the frequency of the signs engraved on the tablets and the frequency of the syllables in the Rapanui language. His assertive phrase that “un parallelisme frappant peut etre établi entre las frequences des signes dans les texts des tablettes et la frequences des syllables dans la langue rapanui… (1996:301)” [Trans: “a parallelism striking can be established between the sign frequencies in the texts of the tablets and the syllabic frequencies in the Rapanui language…”] could make sense and be real. At the same time, he suggests in practice a promising idea to better understand the meaning of the Kohau Rongo Rongo inscriptions and therefore their implicit message.

But on the other hand, the coincidence and overlap between the syllables of “Apai” (a song from the Rapanui tradition recorded among the others in 1886, by the paymaster of the American ship Mohican, William Judah Thomson and a series of rongo rongo glyphs extracted by Podzniakov himself —unfortunately— has not yet been carried out or at least not published.

Jean-Michel Schwartz

Jean-Michel Schwartz published in 1973 in French a book of modest proportions called “Nouvelles Recherches sur L’Ile de Paques” [New Research on Easter Island]. The purpose of the book is to decipher a manuscript consisting of thirteen lines and some 250 apparent rongorongo symbols once possessed and compiled by a native Easter Islander named Tomenika.

According to what Schwartz states, his discoveries are “impressive ,” see also Fischer (1997:246). In said document, the author seems to have found the meaning of the giant “Moai” statues and their mode of transportation, their topographic orientation, the cult of the “bird-man,” the origin of the “moai” wood carvings. kavakava, ” the ritual related to the birth of a child, the origin of Easter eggs, the transmission of writing, genealogical songs and the cult of ancestors. Apart from that, in chapter 8, Schwartz ventures to compare the rongo rongo script with ancient Chinese script which, as he recounts, “opens up unexpected perspectives.” In that context, one notes the “formal analogy” of signs and a “disturbing similarity of meaning” (Schwartz 1973:106) between the signs under comparison, the rongorongo and the Chinese and Schwartz organizes his theory into three sections: similarity of shapes with different meanings; similarity of forms with identical meaning; complete analogy. He cites the Austrian ethnographer Robert von Heine-Geldern who had drawn attention to the strong formal similarities between some archaic Chinese characters from the Chang period and Easter glyphs. One cannot ignore the influence of what was speculated by de Hevesy years before regarding the relationship of the Easter Island script and that of the Indus Valley civilization.

Jacques B.M. Guy

Jacques B.M. Guy is a polyglot and an outstanding French linguist. He has made several significant contributions to the field over the years, the most important being a) the improvement of some of the signs of Barthel's (1958) transliteration system, b) the importance of identifying the nature of a script unknown (in this context, the 'kohau rongorongo') to be able to segment their undivided texts and not incur arbitrary or incidental judgments, and c) after Barthel's insightful observation that some repetitive symbols of the rongo rongo in a section of the tablet “ Mamari” had to do with a kind of lunar calendar, Guy offered arguments that this part of glyphs essentially corresponds to an astronomical canon that dealt with “the topic of intercalary nights” of interspersed nights”] (Guy 1990:145). Serious researchers admit that this part of the signs has been firmly and unquestionably fixed in the entire corpus of kohau rongo rongo. Guy, is also of the opinion that the decipherment of rongo rongo seems improbable, given the paucity of original and consecutive documents, their significant contrast and comparative analysis in a broader context. However, he acknowledges all attempts made on a strictly scientific basis and seems to support them in his own way.

Steven R. Fischer

Steven R. Fischer, a linguist by training and codebreaker and publisher by avocation, arouses enough interest here for his acclaimed decipherment of a particular sequence of rongo rongo signs. He is also known for the publication of a mammoth work entitled RongoRongo, the Easter Island Script: History, Traditions, Texts ('rongorongo: the Easter Island writing system; history, traditions, texts'), where it collects a lot of valuable information.

Fischer in 1995, in his article Preliminary Evidence for Cosmogonic Texts in Rapanui's Rongorongo Inscriptions, published in the "Revista de the Polynesian Society" he exposes that identified sequence, known as the “X1YZ” triad, presumably found in a “copula recital” in the text inscribed on the “Bastón de Santiago”. That particular formula consists of

• X: the copulator god’
• 1: the superlinear, alias ‘the falo’, which in ancient rapanui corresponds to the phrase ki (‘copulted with’)
• And: ‘the copuled goddess’ and
• Z: ‘the fruit of his union’.

This formula, judging by appearances, was compatible with a repetitive pattern found in the indigenous chant Atua-mata-riri ('angry eyes of God'), that is, 'such -and-so copulating with that-and-that [gave birth] to that/that or that/that'. Fischer shrewdly took advantage of this apparent coincidence to see a clear correlation between the inscription on the “Staff of Santiago” and the “A-M-R” recitation, whose central theme is the love affairs of native gods and goddesses and subsequent procreation. Fischer located the following triadic structure 606.076 ['X1'] + 070 ['Y'] = 008 ['Z'], which was transliterated “Te manu mau ki 'ai ki roto ki te ika, [ka pû] te ra'â” and then translated into English: 'All the birds copulated with the fish: there issued forth the sun.' to Spanish: 'All the birds copulated with the fish, then they gave birth to the sun']. Fischer concluded that this procreative model was present in the overwhelming majority of rongo rongo texts. His hypothesis was further strengthened by another publication during the same year in the Revista de Rapa Nui, «Further Evidence for Cosmogonic Texts in the RongoRongo Inscriptions of Easter Island». cosmogony in the rongo rongo inscriptions of Easter Island'). In this way, said translation could serve as a key and a model to penetrate once and for all the rest of the undeciphered rongorongo documents by way of the "domino effect".

Arguments against the triadic formula X1YZ

Despite Fischer's willingness to contribute to the field of rongo rongo studies, there seems to be quite a number of arguments against his claim and hypothesis. Similarly, it must be said that several authors, especially Jacques B. M. Guy (1998a, 1998b), have disputed and severely objected to Fischer's on different occasions.

1. A brief distributional analysis of the rongo rongo text in the “Baston of Santiago”, shows that the recurring pattern “X1YZ” has been exaggerated regarding its regularity and frequency of incidence. In view of the lack of dividing borders between the signs, the precise segmentation is even darker, and as a result, “X1YZ” is unlikely to be identified absolutely and duly in the present document.
2. The absence of the 076 sign (alias, “the phallus”) found in some identical triads of other tablets, has been interpreted as an example of “tautology” by Fischer, since the scribes who recorded them in a later phase according to him, could assume their position and reproduce from memory the complete sequence at the time of chanting it. The interpretation of redundancy seems rather refined to be credible and looks like wanting to ‘round’ the current picture. To make sure of what is said, it is necessary to see the illustration of the two triad structures, the first with the sign 076 attached to the first glyph ‘X’ and the second, without that sign, thus resulting in a triad ‘aphalic’.
3. It is necessary to point out that Fischer omits and does not offer any explanation to many sequences that seem to openly violate what is established by him: “X1YZ”. How can “X1Y1Z” or other extravagant or grotesque combinations be interpreted according to the theorized by him?” Nor have other scholars said anything conclusive in that regard.
4. Fischer in the translation of the epigraphic formula ‘X1YZ’ [-606.076-070-008-] seems to have contributed with an innovative element, the phonetic value ‘mau’. The rest of the signs, once submitted to a reading, undoubtedly evokes the descriptive style of Metoro—captating the iconic message of the kohau rongo signs, in essence—the informant so rebuked by many of the authors, including the same Fischer. One has no choice but to show awe and caution mixed in that context.
5. As it is known, Fischer in his articles (1995a, 1995b) offered as a basic reference to his deciphered model ‘X1YZ’ the verses of the ‘Atua-Mata-Riri’ breeding song, a kind of local “Rosta Piedra”. In spite of a supposed epigraphic “nexo” perceived by him, which exists between ‘A-M-R’ and the text of the ‘Baston of Santiago’ (alias, Text I), both of which are “pre-missionary products of the Easter Island”, if one sits, examines and tries to find clear and formal correlations between the glorious sequences of the “Baston of Santiago” and the verses of “M”
6. Fischer avoids clear references to the prediction of Butinov and Knorozov (1957) concerning the patronymic succession. Thus, if the intended model of Fischer (1995a, 1995b, 1997b) were to be reconciled with the sequences individed by Knorozov and Butinov (1957), the result would be practically ‘engorious’ and inadmissible, as it would be “entità che copulerebbero con la stessa persona per ottenere sé stesse” (Facchetti 2002:224) [Trad: “entities that would copulate with the same person to get themselves.” ]
7. In the absence of reliable and fluent information on the “vertical separator” (Signo 999 according to rongorongo.org and '/' according to Barthel 1958) that appears only and irregularly along the rongo rongo text in question, it is almost impossible to say if that element encodes some phonetic values, if it serves as a punctuation sign (by stating, therefore, the text in significant parts) or if it makes any sense. Fischer, for his part, considers it—without giving conclusive evidence—as a graphic sign to point out the pauses between the sequences involving sexual unions of the deities of Rapa Nui and therefore optimize the idea of a triad structure.
8. Sign 076 carries another problem. For its meaning, Fischer referred to Barthel (1958:280), who, for his part, referred to a reading of Metoro before Bishop Jaussen in relation to line 10 of the rectum of the tablet “Aruku Kurenga”. In that specific reading, the 076 sign turned out to be “an erect penis”, but in other readings of the same sign, Metoro did not present the previous sense. The lack of consistency raises suspicions and as mentioned earlier, the authority of Metoro in the interpretation of the rongo rongo is questionable.
9. The rongo rongo text set in the “Baston of Santiago” is “of a unique nature” compared to the content of other rongo rongo texts. It is the only recorded cane that has survived to this day of the ancient rapanuis where the profusion of the controversial sign 076 is more than evident. The text data are transmitted to us by mere fortune; we do not know with certainty the representative degree of the rapanui language in order to be able to make generalizations regarding the entire rongo corpus. Taking into account the lack of other parallel texts, cosmogenic predictions will have more conjecture, provisionality and less empirical facts. It seems that the comparative analysis of the text of “Baston of Santiago” with other rongo texts is out of place or is quite tangled. Under these circumstances, it is not very clear how the fischerian hypothesis could be irrefutablely accepted or rejected as a probable method of validation.
10. Fischer only offers the translation of a rongo sequence. Although it had made a target, it is clear that deciphering is partial and peripheral within the full context of the existing rongo documents. It would be advisable to reproduce the phonetic values assigned by Fischer to other sequences to verify their result. For some good reason, that hasn't happened yet. It is permissible to say that this fact is related to the scientific idea of a transparent decipherment, as appropriate.
11. So far, Fischer has not presented a reliable list where the rongo rongo signs are classified and systematized paired with their phonetic elements. Such absence can motivate researchers to reach a pit, or to give with picturesque solutions of all tastes.
12. It remains to be said that we must surrender with rigor to the evidence, continue cautiously with the investigation and avoid illusions, in order to shed light on the kohau rongo registrations.

Howard Barraclough (Barry) Fell of the American Epigraphic Society

Harvard University marine biologist-turned-epographer (1911-1994) Howard Barraclough Fell found rongorongo to be a kind of secret script. He predicted that the native informant's readings Metoro Tau'a Ure had been made in an “artificial language of priests” and to be understood they had to be reinterpreted with the help of inscriptions found in New Zealand and other Maori documents [see Fischer 1997:255 -256]. However, one must bear in mind that Dr. Fell claims to have deciphered other epigraphic enigmas such as the Phaistos Disc and one is not sure why researchers still debate such “writings” if Dr. Fell would have got them right by now. One notes a certain esoteric bias in his "translation" technique and that makes his work on rongorongo characterized by a lack of scientific solidity.

Andis Kaulins

Another 'decipherment' has been offered by Andis Kaulins. He claims to have identified on the Honolulu 3 tablet (B.3622) a sequence of aligned signs that "read from right to left" carry within themselves an “astronomical zodiac”. On the other hand, Kaulins acknowledges that the engraved rongo rongo signs “are neither alphabetic, nor syllabic, nor purely hieroglyphic”, but part of “a concept”. To lend credibility and substance to what he claims, he refers to the document apparently 'signed' by some Rapanui native chiefs and delivered to the departure of Spanish Captain Felipe González y Haedo during his visit in 1770, who claimed the newly discovered territory on behalf of the King Charles III of Spain. Kaulins says that "pictographs (i.e. rongo rongo signs) have simply become more and more 'hieratic', i.e. 'cursive', as (hopefully) writing becomes so over time." Although theoretically this is presumable –recall the case of the three forms of writing typical of Pharaonic Egypt: hieroglyphic, hieratic and demotic– what Caulins predicted would require additional evidence of kohau rongo rongo documents 'subscribed' or 'inscribed' in cursive to corroborate its derivation from the glyphic form. The Italian scholar Facchetti (2002:212) rightly reveals that “il fatto che di tale presumpto rongorongo corsivo non si avrebbe altro esempio all'infuori di questo, il che rende quest& #39;ipotesi un ad hoc incredibile.” [translation: "the fact that of such alleged rongorongo cursive there is no other example except this one, makes said hypothesis ad hoc not credible.” Facchetti shows another argument when he says that the sign 200 or 300 (Barthel's catalogue, 1958) —which retains its original glyphic form in the subscription— contradicts the rest of the “cursive letters” in which the document appears.

In addition, some suggest that the indigenous signature could simply be a hasty reaction or an attempt to imitate the handwriting of the Spanish. Another reasoning that seems to support what has been said is the following: other laymen or professionals could see or capture other symbols/messages behind "the pictograms" of the document "signed" by the cacique. With the exception of two symbols —200 (or 300) and 51— (Barthel's catalogue, 1958) that also appear in the island's petroglyphics and are somewhat identifiable, the rest are more like the squiggles of a child and can be interpreted from many perspectives. An interviewee (who wishes to remain anonymous), after viewing the signs in question, suggested that they “represent a land ownership document”. While another person suggested that it was "a corpse and possible clues to lead us to said dead body”. Under the circumstances, one has no choice but to be suspicious of the validity of Kaulins's proposal.

Martha J. Macri

Martha J. Macri, a specialist in linguistic anthropology at the University of California at Davis, has developed an intense activity in the field of North American indigenous languages and Mesoamerican writing systems. She is a promoter of the MHDP ( Maya Hieroglyphic Database Project & # 39; Mayan hieroglyphic database project & # 39;). Among other things, Macri has published a short study entitled "Rongo rongo de la isla de Pascua" in Writing Systems of the World by Peter Daniels and William Bright, where she defends the logographic-phonetic hypothesis of the rongo rongo calligraphy. According to Macri, the rongo rongo encloses a central group of signs —less than 70— that are combined with each other, merging to generate most of the inventory of elements. Like the Russian Pozdniakov, she proposes that rongo rongo is, in essence, a syllabary plus a certain number of logograms, in which certain logograms such as "the crescent moon" or "the lizard" do not form compound signs. Therefore, it is to be assumed that the signs appear similar to the phonetic blocks (syllables + vowels), where each one could represent individual words of the ancient Rapanui language. It should be noted that some researchers seem to have established a certain consensus in relation to this plausible proposal.

However, Macri, like Pozdniakov, Fischer and other researchers, has not yet offered a detailed list of phonetic values corresponding to the rongo rongo signs, in the manner of Michael Ventris with “Linear B”. That area of research seems promising, and other scholars are concentrating their efforts to find the key to unraveling the rongo rongo mystery.

Michael H. Dietrich

In an article published in the eighth volume of Asian and African Studies (Asian and African studies) of 1998 and 1999, titled Little Eyes on a Big Trip. Star Navigation as Rongorongo Inscriptions ('Little Eyes – About a Long Journey. Stellar Navigation in Rongo Rongo Inscriptions'), Michael H. Dietrich, a designer and graphic artist from Stuttgart, Germany, hypothesizes that the rongo rongo does not contain texts of a coherent nature that involve stories and rituals of genesis, religious songs, genealogical lists, etc. Instead, he ventures to predict that astronomical orientation maps are carved on the Kohau Rongo Rongo tablets. The ancient Polynesians were reputed to be experienced navigators who could cover enormous distances in the Pacific, without the assistance of instruments and under the guidance of the stars, the winds, the flight of birds, and the sea currents. In this regard, the ancient Rapanuis, like other Polynesians, passed orally the accumulated information from one generation to another. Based on these assumptions, Dietrich made parallel observations of celestial bodies to confirm his theory and later conclude that the Kohau Rongo Rongo tablets were designed and executed exclusively as a list of instructions for "sidereal navigation" through the Ocean. Peaceful. The secret of the rongo rongo therefore, according to the German researcher, lies in scrutinizing the Polynesian wisdom collected over the centuries in the field of astronomy.

Egbert Richter-Ushanas

The German researcher from Bremen, Egbert Richter-Ushanas, has offered another decipherment alternative. After analyzing two of the objects incised with rongo rongo signs, the pectoral ornament “Reimiro 2”, alias 'the Reimiro of London 9295' and the "Bird-Man of New York", note the presence of signs 050 and 051 (Barthel catalogue, 1958) which have traditionally been related to symbols of fertility and productivity in Rapanui folklore, representing the vulva or the earth, as recipients of semen and procreation elements. Starting from this and probably referring to what was related by Métraux in his ethnological report (1940:106), «each girl was on a rock called papa-rona, with her legs apart and wide open, while two men below examined her face. vulva» (), Richter-Ushanas is inclined to believe that the sequences contain information about “defloration ceremonies”, “circumcision” and “vulva inspection”. All of this was linked to sacred acts of initiation (known as take) of the maidens and young men in a state of puberty, fulfilling their designated role in ancient Rapa Nui society. Below is a sample of what was translated:

After the incision of the fish,

After the vulva has been inspected,
After the vulva has been pierced,
after the good thing (the vulva) has been grasped,
the fish and the vulva are carved on the rock”.
If the vulva is small, they incise (the sign of) of the vulva on the rock.
The girl's vulva is the navel of the earth,
the girl's vulva is the navel of the earth,

the girl's vulva on the hill, the girl's vulva.

After the fish incision,

after the vulva is inspected,
after the vulva is drilled,
after the good thing (the vulva) has been caught,
the fish and the vulva have been recorded on the rock.

If the vulva is a girl, they graban (the sign) of the vulva on the rock.
The vulva of the girl is the navel of the earth,
The vulva of the girl is the navel of the earth,

The girl's vulva on the hill, the girl's vulva.

In many tribal societies, symbolic initiation rites for women, related to the awareness of pain and procreation, were common, elaborate and of the utmost importance for their survival in the face of adversity. As long as the phonetic values, assigned by Richter-Ushanas in only two particular rongorongo manuscripts, are not reproduced in the entire corpus to obtain a coherent reading, it can be affirmed that the translation will remain within a purely speculative sphere.

Richard W. Sproat

Richard W. Sproat is an expert in computational linguistics and world writing systems, first based at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA, and currently working at the Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA. He is responsible for a major study: Approximate String Matches in the Rongorongo Corpus. Following Kudryavtsev's and Guy's tradition of finding similar passages in various rongo rongo tablets, discovered through the computational use of “suffix numeric data” ['suffix array'] later partial correlations in the corpus of extant rongo rongo tablets. Among the most outstanding conclusions of his work are the following: a) “…the various forms of the glyph included by Barthel under the same basic numerical code are in fact just variants of the same glyph rather than separate glyphs.” [Translation: "various forms of the glyphs included by Barthel in the same basic numerical code are, in fact, simply variants of the same glyph, and not separate glyphs." b) “…the Santiago Staff seems to be an isolate, matching with almost nothing else except itself.” is correlated with almost nothing except itself."]. c) “…with sufficient assumptions about what may be present, any string can match with any other string, so it's not clear how one would falsify Fischer's claim in the absence of independent evidence. ” [Translation: “with sufficient assumptions about what might be present (in other rongo rongo texts), every sequence can be correlated with every other sequence, so it is not clear how one can falsify (accept or reject) the Fischer's assertion, considering the absence of independent evidence”]. His article highlights the utility of computer models and the relevance of distributional, statistical, and comparative analysis of glyphic sequences to advance rongo rongo studies. It seems that future successes in this field will be closely linked and consistent with the application of such analyses.

Giulio M. Facchetti

Giulio M. Facchetti, a professor and researcher based at the Libera Università di Lingue e Comunicazione (IULM), Milan, Italy, published in 2002 a book entitled Anthropologia della scrittura. Con un'appendice sulla questione del rongorongo dell'isola di Pasqua. ("Anthropology of writing. With an appendix on the matter of the rongorongo of Easter Island.”), the which deserves full attention here. He tries to respond in his appendix to the demands of the scientific method by doing everything possible to elucidate some issues related to the kohau rongo rongo. It can be estimated that after examining the details of the interpretation of the lunar calendar by Jacques B.M. Guy (1990) and after finding relationships with other writing systems, such as Sumerian or ancient Egyptian, Facchetti (2002:206) is susceptible to believing that rongorongo “sia un sistema di scrittura pienamente sviluppato”, [Trans: “be a fully developed writing system”] in tune with such authors as Guy, Fischer, Pozdniakov and Macri. Another contribution of his refers to the Metoro readings already collected in a particular list by Bishop Jaussen. Over the years, Metoro's credibility has been debatable given conflicting opinions. He supports Métraux regarding Metoro's aptitude to recognize the kohau rongo rongo signs saying “le letture di Metoro, e soprattutto la lista di segni con relative interpretazione ricavata da Jaussen …sembrano poter essere utilizzate, in molti casi e con le dovute cautele, per identificare l'oggetto rappresentato dal segno o perfino il suo significato” (2002:203). [Trans: “Metoro's readings, especially the list of signs with the relative interpretation drawn from Jaussen... seem to be capable of being used, in many cases and with due caution, to identify the object represented by the sign or even its meaning.”] Facchetti does a special job when he analyzes the repeated trigraph '008.078.711' (Barthel's catalogue, 1958) that appears in the sequences segmented by Guy (1990) and labeled with the letter B. Breaking down the trigraph and comparing its constituent elements with Jaussen's List, he notes that the sign 008 corresponds to 'ra'à' [Trans: sun / 'there': fire / 'hetu'u': star, celestial body] (p. 2); the sign 078 corresponds to ‘higa’ [Trans: caer] (p.10), seeing a “pictographic composition… simply to indicate “the displacement of a celestial body”. Regarding the third sign 711, the fish “face up” or “face down”, Facchetti does not exclude the phonetic value “hiti” for it, being “the name of a particular fish” and also “homophone of the verb to reappear (used specifically with the moon and the constellations» The semantic and phonetic coherence perceived in this compound sign pushes Facchetti to propose the verification of this phonogram in other contexts.

Unlike Guy, Facchetti (2002: 221, 224, 226) is more optimistic about a future decipherment of the Kohau rongo rongo texts. Dismissing the idea of a miraculous “key”, he draws on a certain parallelism between the efforts made to understand Maya writing and those needed to understand and read kohau rongo rongo. From this, the Italian scholar admits a long and progressive process where the combinatorial and comparative analysis of signs is taken for granted.

The Next Generation of Scholars

Albert Davletshin

Albert Davletshin of the Knorosov Center for Mesoamerican Studies, of the Russian State University for the Humanities, Moscow, presented in 2002 an article related to the insertion of names, nicknames and titles in three distinctive texts rongorongo, the Little Santiago Tablet [verso] (aka “text G”), the Staff of Santiago (aka “text I”), and the Honolulu Tablet B.3629 (aka “text T”). These texts display crowded sequences in which the frequent occurrence of the sign 076 is noted (see Barthel 1958). The sign in question points to a peremptory element in a text or in text sections of a homogeneous nature, the nature of which is still controversial among scholars.

It so happens that the sequences in the three artifacts examined are not identical. According to the author, the Staff of Santiago bears the sign 000/199 (the vertical bar that may have logographic value), almost absent or omitted in the other two texts (see Melka 2009:38); in the texts of the Staff of Santiago and the Tablet of Honolulu B.3629 there are no fragments of unmarked texts and in the verso of the Tablet of Little Santiago, the glyphic sequences possessing the sign 076 are separated by segments of unmarked text. marked by the scored sign. Davletshin, well trained in ways of writing the world, deviates from undeserved speculation and gives concise and estimable explanations about the values of the aforementioned sign. After elaborating the proposal of Butinov and Knorosov (1957), after the analysis of the embedded structures of rongorongo and after references to veridical academic, ethnographic and historical sources, he offers to deliberate that in the Honolulu Tablet B.3629 (alias "text T") are lists of names partially marked with titles; in the Little Santiago Tablet [verso] (alias «text G») there are six sequences of names, separated by textual fragments not marked with the sign 076, while in the long document of the Bastón de Santiago (alias «text I») displays an exclusive list of more than 500 names.

Among other assumptions of the essay, the sign 076 is designated as ‘syllabic,’ corresponding to “ko,” a subject marker, thus revising the patronymic value of Butinov and Knorosov (1957). This marker usually goes in the initial position, before names, in genealogies and onomastic inventories. Given the compilation of those artifacts where such genera of kohau rongo rongo as «catalogues of names of victims and sacrificed», «catalogues of fugitive names», catalogs of «names of deceased/succumbidos' and «annals» can appear,” what the author stated visibly gains strength and plausibility. In conclusion, it must be said that the scarcity of material rongorongo with the sign 076 as an attribute of distinctive texts, however, impermeables the resounding identification of names and therefore, does not allow a sustained autonomy of investigation.

Paul Horley

Paul Horley of the Yuri Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University, Ukraine, edited in 2005 in the 'Revista de Rapa Nui' the article «Allographic Variations and Statistical Analysis of the Rongorongo Script» (translation: 'allographic variations and statistical analysis of the rongorongo writing'). He tries—with boldness and ambition—to address the essential problems that the kohau rongo rongo phenomenon presents today: 1. simplification and reorganization of Barthel's catalog (1958); 2. clarification of the nature of the inscriptions providing a complete statistical analysis; 3. theorize about the age of the inscriptions and 4. offer different suggestions, eg, the manner of engraving and the direction of reading of the glyphs; the possible meaning of glyph 076 (the supposed 'phallus' in Steven R. Fischer's hypothesis, 1995a, 1995b).

1. Several researchers (Guy 1985, 2006, Pozdniakov 1996, Fischer 1997, Sproat 2003, 2007) have emphasized that the repertoire of glyphs registered by Barthel (1958), by practice and 'forcible' that is its validity, is defective to some extent, due to the absence of clear criteria of cataloguing, as well as due to some intrinsic 'arbidity' that Bartheludi (1958). This is particularly noticeable when examining complex glyphs and finding the parts. Thus, there is still no commitment to how to decompose them and set them appropriately. The argument becomes more difficult if one sets out on the stylistic versions embedded or capriciously embedded in the same glyph or in a similar sequence of glyphs apparently submitted by different scribes of the ancient Rapanui in the course of the years and in the field of different local schools. It should be recalled that the existing corpus, for historical reasons, is due to chance and has already been established. Therefore, one is forced to meet with inter-contextual fortuitous comparisons that can be somewhat advantageous. Define the number of glyphs rongorongo responsible for a “base core” capable of generating variability and subsequent recombinations, it seems rightly obligatory task, as in other cases of world writing systems. And that is due to the fact that without having an objective and methodically ordained and explained nomenclature regarding its way of prescribing the glyphs according to the context, it cannot be predicted what form of ‘writing’ would correspond rongo rongo. If it were an essentially silabical system, rongo rongo could contain between fifty (50) and seventy-short (g) signs, but if it were logo-silábic (logograms + syllables), it could contain several hundred, not to mention the fact that if it were purely logo-graphic or iconic, it would be worth a thousand signs or more. Although the corpus is limited and ‘closed,’ what needs to be done is to proceed to such an analysis to maximize the finding of a “base core”, and after a “concordance system” through which all the basic forms and their supposed variants could be recovered, the alomorphs in other words. In a hypothetical case, the ‘concordance’ could be applied to ancient authentic texts of the pascuence oral tradition to match some parallel. Horley (2005) is well aware of these problems, and after examining and comparing the structure of a number of documents, it offers a catalogue (2005:111-112) consisting of fifty (50) primordial glyphs and adjusted variants. Subsequently, after statistical analysis, the author offers maps of intropic concordance between the distribution of words (based on syllables) in rapanui texts and rongo rongo writing models in search of phonetic effects (see e.g. Zipf 1949:85). The publication space you would have at your disposal to raise more data and evidence in favour of your hypothesis would be an impediment to clarify details regarding each contribution in your list. Furthermore, anyone who is in intimate terms with George Zipf's proposal (1949) can point out that this model has been applied equally successfully by independent researchers on different fields of science, in some of which there are no linguistic elements. In that context, it remains to be emphasized that the concrete and thorough distinction between systems prone to orality or not, will be the next step to be taken.
2. The age of kohau rongo inscriptions has been constantly under discussion. The main currents involved are: the one that gives arguments for writing created after contact with Europeans in the centuryXVIII (the visit of two Spanish ships in 1770) and the one that claims that kohau rongo rongo precedes the arrival of the Europeans, being therefore original product rapanui. The first, represented by Kenneth P. Emory, Steven R. Fischer and Giulio M.Facchetti, argues that the rapanuis took the idea of the Spaniards as Sequoyah, a Cheroqui Indian, who invented a silage incited by the encounter with the white settlers in 1821 in North America. Another argument is the large-scale absence of traces of inscriptions on engraving materials, in particular stones and rock, e.g., on the statues of moais. The second, mainly represented by Georgia Lee of the UCLA and by Jacques B.M. Guy, argues that there are a number of cave paintings in rocks and caves in which certain motives evoke the style of the rongorongo. Lee (1992) specified ‘Certain designs in the rock art were established as rongorongo glyphs, allowing us to postulate that the carved wood tablets antedated contact with the western world’ [Trad: ‘Certain designs in rupetral art have been established as rongorongo glyphs, allowing us to postulate that the wood-recorded tablets preceded contact with the Western world.’] is also not convinced by Fischer’s idea of importing the form of writing of the Europeans.‘When we know that a tablet has been identified as containing a lunar calendar (Barthel 1958) or perhaps an astronomical canon for predicting when intercalary nights should be inserted in the month (Guy 1990), it is difficult to entertain the proposed notion that the Easter Islanders got the idea of writing in 1770 from visiting Spaniards, had forgotten about it all by 1864, and meanwhile record the little timber they had to [Trad: ‘When we already know that a tablet has been identified that contains a lunar calendar (Barthel 1958) or perhaps an astronomical canon to predict when ‘intercalated nights’ should be inserted in a month (Guy 1990), it is difficult to consider the proposed notion that the pascuences received the idea in 1770 after the visit of the Spaniards, that the whole thing would have forgotten him about 1864 and entertained Although Lee and Guy were right, there could not be a certain possibility, as remote as it were, that the former petroglyphs lacked old phonetic values and that they would receive that function once the visit of the Spaniards was completed in 1770. Horley opts for Lee and Guy's posture, offering more images found in the red slag formations (which served as 'shadows' to the Moais) and in wooden statuillas possibly representing parallels with the ko hau rongorongo. In that context, he also claims the idea that the tahua tablet, recorded in a row of a European or American ship of the centuryXVIII or XIX, contains a text rongorongo significantly long giving faith of an already developed writing. At this point we remember that this unknown remains still opaque and that proposed by Horley would have more base and credibility if further evidence of engravings, whether on wood, be on rock.
3. Referring to Guy's work (1982:447) regarding the orientation of engraving and reading of the fused glyphs that could be read from below to above,‘Such fused glyphs, therefore, have been read – and almost certainly also carved –from bottom to top. ’ [Trad: ‘Tales glifos merged, therefore, would have been read – and almost certainly engraved – from below to top.’], Horley (2005:110) takes sides for Guy's conclusion. Anyway, he says ‘... some exceptions exist’ [Trad: ‘...some exceptions exist’], citing the examples of glyphs 551 and probably those listed by Barthel (1958), from 730 to 739, “the marine creatures”.
4. Sign 076, the alleged ‘fail’ in the translation of Fischer (1995a, 1995b, 1997b), is also given due attention by Horley, who sees in the ‘stable repetitive pattern’ [Trad: ‘repetitive stable patron’] in the ‘Text I’ and at the same time, try to find a ‘parallel’ in the rapanui language. As far as its meaning is concerned, Horley (2005:109) is inclined by the Vocative particle ‘e’ (see Du Feu 1996:125), since the tablets could include indigenous creations, such as songs, hymns or varied songs. This vocation is frequent in the rapanui folklore.

Thus, Métraux (1940:355-6) offers a model of the Rapanui folk song of 'Lamentation'.

Lament (Lamentation)

In Rapanui,

E hata tae kava
E kakai koe ia, Tau-mahani, i te
vie honui e.

E hata tae kava e,
E ka kai koe ia, Tau-mahani, i te
vie honui e.

In English,

You eat, Tau-mahani, the respectable
woman.

O bug that does not smell
You eat, Tau-mahani, the respectable
woman.

Translated into Spanish,

Oh, bug that doesn't smell.
Oh, you who eat Tau-mahani, the respected one.
woman.

Oh, bug that doesn't smell.
Oh, you who eat Tau-mahani, the respected one.
woman.

While plausible, that bold suggestion has to be tested by other scholars during their independent investigations. We say that, taking into account that several authors, that is, Knorozov and Butinov (1957), Barthel (1958), Fischer (1997), Guy (1998) have claimed the meaning of the sign 076, the object of permanent discussion in 'the forum ' of the rongorongo.

Mari of Laat

The book “Words Extracted from Wood: Proposals for the Decipherment of the Easter Island Script” by Mari de Laat was published in the Netherlands in 2009.

The author offers a detailed work in his 300 pages on the assignment of phonetic values and the translation of three important rongorongo texts: those of the 'Tahua,' tablet from the 'Aruku Kurenga' tablet and from the 'Keiti.' tablet. The main consideration raised is that of a mostly syllabic script, previously proposed by Macri (1996) and Pozdniakov (nineteen ninety six). The task itself is impressive, if we assume the time spent and analyze the careful treatment of the subject. The results obtained are another matter and their veracity raises questions that are difficult to answer. If we refer to the article by Paul Horley (2009a), there we can find clear arguments that play down such importance to what de Laat (2009) offers.

Two other arguments that can be added to the matter and that need clarification are the following: the compound sign 380.001 representing a 'person seated in profile carrying a staff' is read on the tablet 'Keiti' as Taea, a character who is charged with the murder of his wife. The glyphic compound 380.001 has been claimed as a silent determiner by several authors (see Barthel 1958:304, 309-310; Guy 2006; Horley 2007:27), marking the start of short sequences that include lists and other stereotyped formulas and manifested in a number of rongorongo registrations. There are seven additional rongorongo texts in which the use of the delimiting group 380.001 is evidenced directly or indirectly, profusely or modestly. If the identification were correct and taking into account that the existing inscriptions of rongorongo are due to pure chance (whether by gift, collection or purchase), this would mean that the presumed uxoricide Taea appears in more than 25% of the corpus present. If we go back to the time of Brother Eyraud (1864) who made known to the world the existence of rongorongo, possibly inscribed on hundreds of objects and preserved in the huts and houses of the native Easterlings, the fact discussed, by analogy, would translate into the following: one, or parts of one of four tablets or copies produced in the different 'schools' of rongorongo would implicate in one way or another the impulsive Taea and her acts. This proposal suggests that Taea was the protagonist of many tales and narratives on ancient Easter Island, threatening or even stealing prominence from the supreme divinity of the natives, Makemake, the maker of the world and many of its creatures. In short, the ancient Easterlings had better things to do than record the drama of a certain Taea in a flash on his prized pieces of wood, a very rare material in itself due to the increasing deforestation of the island's surface..

The phonetic value 'mo' assigned to glyph 076, see de Laat (2009:27-28), assumes multiple translations due to the polyvalent nature of the Easter language, conditioned by the reduced inventory of phonemes. It can be said that there are three rongorongo texts that probably form a subgroup within the extant corpus, whose distinctive nature is particularly striking. They are those of the Bastón de Santiago (text Ia), that of Honolulú 3629 (text T) and that of the verso of the small Tablet of Santiago (Gv text). These texts are structurally marked by repeated short sequences of a triadic nature, mostly (although there are no exceptions) that possibly match lists of victims and those killed in wars and skirmishes (the famous kohau îka), with lists of magical spells and curses (the thymus), with genealogical lists, etc. If we reproduce the supposed 'mo' throughout the three mentioned inscriptions in which 076 appears, one wonders why there is no consistency, nor phonetics (according to de Laat 2009), nor semantics (modeled on the island's oral traditions, see Thomson 1891, Routledge 1919, Métraux 1940:395, Barthel 1958, Fischer 1997:287, Guy 1998c:109).

Martyn Harris and Tomi S. Melka

The 'Journal of Quantitative Linguistics' has published a study regarding the detection of gender and other correlated issues in a number of ancient rongorongo inscriptions from the Easter Island.

Authors Martyn Harris and Tomi S. Melka (2011a, b) develop a preliminary analysis proposed by Melka about the possible affinity (semantic and/or phonetic) between the glyphs representing îka (the 'fish-like glyph 700 ' [îka] according to Barthel's 1958 nomenclature) and 'frigate birds' (glyph 600 and some variants) in rongorongo texts, based on a brief sequence of glyphs ornithomorphs on the tablet 'Mamari.' Scholars submit for analysis texts containing possible lists, such as 'Mamari,' 'la Menor de Santiago,' the 'Staff of Santiago,' and the tablet 'Honolulú B.3623,' suggesting that fragments of these may incorporate lists of 'victims and slain' (see Routledge 1919, Knoche 1939, Barthel 1958, Fischer 1997, Guy 1998c, Davletshin 2002) and spells and curses known in times past as thymus, whose purpose was to offer shelter from evil spirits and perj predicate and cause the death of offenders and criminals (see Englert 1948).

His work adopts a mixed methodology that includes several scientific disciplines, e.g. eg ethnology, anthropology, corpus linguistics, lexical statistics, and extraction of information to corroborate the hypothesis. The results seem to confirm his initial conjecture; however, during the course of the essay they claim responsibility for having identified a correlation between glyph 6 (the 'hand' [rhyming] shape) with glyphs 700 and 600, which suggests a parallelism with the action of 'grasping' or 'capturing,' if the genre of these key-texts is considered. It is highly probable that said glyph, i.e. 6, corresponds in several contexts to a possessive particle, as was proposed in an earlier work by Pozdniakov & Pozdniakov (2007).

The article is of interest in the sense that it is multidisciplinary. In any case, it is still premature to say if his is entirely correct. Let time pass by to report on this line of research and see if his method is fruitful in terms of contributing to a feasible decipherment of the rongorongo.