Content deleted Content added
m nn: |
CJLL Wright (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 14:
== The linguistic breakthroughs ==
What was only in retrospect widely-recognized as a major breakthrough was made by [[Yuri Knorosov]] in the [[1950s]], when he published a paper arguing that the so-called "de Landa alphabet" contained in [[Bishop Diego de Landa]]'s manuscript ''Relación de las Cosas de Yucatán'' was actually made of [[syllabary|syllabic]], rather than [[alphabet]]ic symbols. As Knorosov's early essays contained few new readings, and the [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] editors added propagandistic claims to the effect that Knorosov was using a peculiarly "[[Marxism|Marxist]]-[[Leninism|Leninist]]" approach to decipherment, many Western
However, it was the combination of the work of Knorosov with a historically-oriented approach first outlined by Russian-American scholar [[Tatiana Proskouriakoff]] that truly set in motion the winds of change in Maya decipherment. In [[1959]], examining what she called "a peculiar pattern of dates" on stone monument inscriptions at the Classic Maya site of [[Piedras Negras, Guatemala|Piedras Negras]], Proskouriakoff determined that these represented events in the life-span of an individual, rather than relating to religion, astronomy, or prophesy, as held by the "old school" exemplified by Thompson. This proved to be true of many Maya inscriptions, and revealed the Maya [[epigraphy|epigraphic]] record to be one relating actual histories of ruling individuals: dynastic histories similar in nature to those recorded in literate human cultures throughout the world. Suddenly, the Maya entered written history.
|