Graphic and spatial devices in the deciphering of ancient scripts: the cuneiform writing

Abstract

Grotefend’s decipherment of the cuneiform writing system in the early 1800s presents exemplary characteristics of all unknown deciphering writing processes. The decipherer formulates risky hypotheses, completely devoid of evidence, formulating general laws and specific hypotheses based on his personal intuition starting from a minimum basis of historical and cultural knowledge on the civilization that used this writing. In other words, it follows exactly the logical procedure called creative abduction by Peirce, of which it is indeed an exemplary case. From these hypotheses the decipherer draws consequences that he considers established, even without having any confirmation, and formulates other chain hypotheses, up to the final finding of the discovery of a certain empirical datum that validates the whole chain of reasoning formulated.
This process is entirely visual. The identification of sequences of symbols and characters as words and the identification of their meaning are carried out based on the observation of the recurrences and frequencies of use, and the position of the symbols in the line and in the text, as well as on the basis of the circumstances of use (place, form and position of the writing medium) that collaborate in determining the semantic, morphological and lexical interpretation of the text.
On the other hand, the phonetic interpretation of writing has little relevance: sound and pronunciation of symbols and characters come last and do not make a significant contribution to deciphering.