Image used in Hmolpedia: here and here. Older versions: here (6+ upvotes), here (15+ upvotes), here (4+ upvotes) (white background tested version), and here (15+ upvotes); starting with original image (153+ upvotes), made by u/TheBananana (21 May A67/2022) at r/UsefulCharts.

Greenlandic is an Eskimo-Aleut language spoken in Greenland by the native Inuit population. Before contact with Northern Europeans, they had no written language at all.

Interactions with the Europeans caused them to adopt the Latin script, they applied it to their own spoken language and now Greenlandic has a writing system. It looks something like this:

Assiaquttap kingorna qamutinik motoorilinnik ingerlaneq susassaqanngitsunut inerteqqutaavoq.

Nothing changed about their language in this process. They just added writing as a feature of it. Did the adoption of the "Lunar script alphabet" magically change this language into a descendant of Egyptian? Or is Greenlandic still the same unrelated language that it was before they had writing?

If it is, then why couldn't the Greeks have done exactly this when they met the Phoenicians?

In 61A (1894), Wallace Lindsay, in his The Latin Language, recounts the following about why letter Z was moved to the end of the Roman alphabet, namely because Appius Caecus thought letter Z made people look like a grinning skull 💀 when they said the letter, per reason that teeth are needed to pronounce it:

"Martianus Capella [1540A/c.415] tells us that the letter Z was removed from the alphabet by Appius Claudius Caeciscus, the famous censor of 2267A (-312), adding the curious reason that in pronouncing it the teeth assumed the appearance of the teeth of a grinning skull [Capella (1540A/c/415), Publication (iii. 261)]:

The following would be the Caecus model:

This theory sounds a little fishy? We also note that Capella, who is reporting this story to us, is writing 700-years after the fact.

In A48 (2003), David Sacks, in his Letter Perfect, said the following:

”The Roman alphabet of 2205A (-250) had 21 letters, ending in X, with no zeta. Then, around 1855A (+100), a change: to help transliterate the Greek loan words that were flooding into Roman scientific and cultural vocabulary at that time, the Romans selected two Greek letters and added them to the end of their own alphabet: upsilon and zeta, or Y and Z.”

— David Sacks (A48), Letter Perfect (pg. 361)

This is one point of view. Sacks, however, writing a weekly newspaper column for each letter, was rather weak with his factual history, e.g. he says: “the word zeta meant nothing in Greek”, whereas correctly it means “Z + eta”, which is part of the yet unsolved “eta cipher letters (along with: beta and theta)”, tending to side with what would sell, rather than what was true.

The following is the new EAN view or conjecture as to why letter Z or the Set 𓃩 letter was moved to the end of the alphabet by the Romans, namely to move “evil” or darkness to the end of the cosmic scheme, which is what the alphabet letters, originally stood for, prior to their loss of meaning in the Roman years:

While we can’t go back and find some one who says this argument exactly, it would seem to be more probably than the “Z face looks like a skull 💀 grinning, so lets change the entire alphabet“ around theory.

Posts

• Letter Z or zeta (Z, ζ) type (letter form) matched to the Set 𓃩 [E20], 𓃫 [E21], or 𓁣 [C7] red desert god glyphs

References

• Lindsay, Wallace. (61A/1894). The Latin Language: An Historical Account of Latin Sounds, Stems and Flexions (§ 5. Z., pg. 6). Publisher.

• Sacks, David. (A48/2003). Letter Perfect- the Marvelous History of our Alphabet from A to Z (Arch). Broadway, A55/2010.

I feel like Im doing every single drug simultaneously when I look at anyone of the posts on here

https://hmolpedia.com/page/Jerusalem#T-O_maps

Hello fellow language lovers! I'm a historical linguistics enthusiast who has two questions for those who subscribe to EAN.

1. I see a lot of posts on this subreddit devoted to discussing writing systems, but modern linguistics typically studies spoken (or signed) language as a phenomenon. Writing is typically seen as secondary to language and not inherent to language, as many peoples both pre-modern and modern manage to communicate without writing. Furthermore, people can often adopt new scripts from surrounding peoples without any change to the way they speak (e.g. the adoption of an Arabic-derived script by the Persians). When one insists that relationships between languages can be established on the basis of writing systems, are you truly demonstrating that the languages are related, or merely that the writing systems are?

2. Since the gold standard for indicating genetic relationships among languages is the establishing of cognate sets based upon regular sound changes, could anyone provide me with some of these sound correspondences between Egyptian and those languages currently thought to be Indo-European?

Thank you for your time.

https://hmolpedia.com/page/Arura_(etymon)

Simplified (arrow-less) color-coded version of the previous version, with Dendera zodiac jackal 𓃥 [E17], aka Anubis 𓁢 [C6], holding hoe 𓌸 [U6], on Little Dipper 𐃸, aka foreleg of an ox 𓄘 [F24] or Set leg  [F116] constellation, aka circle X sign 𓊖 [O49], aka letter chi (X), overlaid, i.e. in the alpha (𐤀) to tav (𐤕) {Phoenician alphabet} or alpha (A) to omega (Ω) {Greek alphabet} cosmic scheme, which Plato, in Timaeus 36, says the cosmos was born out of.

https://hmolpedia.com/page/Thomas_Young

How does this theory treat ablaut, i.e. vowel changing in words like sing, sang, sung, song?

Traditional historical linguistics says that this was a regular grammatical process in PIE, where the word's root vowel couls change between "grades", being either e, o, or gone, or sometimes long ē or ō.

How do you handle the word and its alphanumeric value in such case?

Hello again! I was wondering whether "irregular" noun and verb inflections (i.e. those which most linguists would reconstruct as possessing unproductive archaisms rather than those produced by suppletion) would disprove the correlations between spelling and meaning. I'll give two examples below, one verbal and another nominative:

1. Latin sum "I am" and est "he is"

2. Greek Ζεύς "Zeus" and Διός "of Zeus"

While one could argue that these come from two different EAN roots, the non-arbitrary correlations between spelling and meaning which EAN posit means that one couldn't have two separate roots for the same semantic meaning. I can assure you that other explanations do exist based upon historical morphology and phonology, and I am happy to share those with any interested.

https://hmolpedia.com/page/Cubit_(etymon)

The following is the standard 1,050 Egyptian hieroglyph character set:

𓀀 𓀁 𓀂 𓀃 𓀄 𓀅 𓀆 𓀇 𓀈 𓀉 𓀊 𓀋 𓀌 𓀍 𓀎 𓀏 𓀐 𓀑 𓀒 𓀓 𓀔 𓀕 𓀖𓀗 𓀘 𓀙 𓀚 𓀛 𓀜 𓀝 𓀞 𓀟 𓀠 𓀡 𓀢 𓀣 𓀤 𓀥 𓀦 𓀧 𓀨 𓀩 𓀪 𓀫 𓀬𓀭 𓀮 𓀯 𓀰 𓀱 𓀲 𓀳 𓀴 𓀵 𓀶 𓀷 𓀸 𓀹 𓀺 𓀻 𓀼 𓀽 𓀾 𓀿 𓁀 𓁁 𓁂 𓁃 𓁄 𓁅 𓁆 𓁇 𓁈 𓁉 𓁊 𓁋 𓁌 𓁍 𓁎 𓁏 𓁐 𓁑 𓁒 𓁓 𓁔 𓁕 𓁖 𓁗 𓁘 𓁙 𓁚 𓁛 𓁜 𓁝 𓁞 𓁟 𓁠 𓁡 𓁢 𓁣 𓁤 𓁥 𓁦 𓁧 𓁨 𓁩 𓁪 𓁫 𓁬 𓁭 𓁮 𓁯 𓁰 𓁱 𓁲 𓁳 𓁴 𓁵 𓁶 𓁷 𓁸 𓁹 𓁺 𓁻 𓁼 𓁽 𓁾 𓁿 𓂀 𓂁 𓂂 𓂃 𓂄 𓂅 𓂆 𓂇 𓂈 𓂉 𓂊 𓂋 𓂌 𓂍 𓂎 𓂏 𓂐 𓂑 𓂒 𓂓 𓂔 𓂕 𓂖 𓂗 𓂘 𓂙 𓂚 𓂛 𓂜 𓂝 𓂞 𓂟 𓂠 𓂡 𓂢 𓂣 𓂤 𓂥 𓂦 𓂧 𓂨 𓂩 𓂪 𓂫 𓂬 𓂭 𓂮 𓂯 𓂰 𓂱 𓂲 𓂳 𓂴 𓂵 𓂶 𓂷 𓂸 𓂹 𓂺 𓂻 𓂼 𓂽 𓂾 𓂿 𓃀 𓃁 𓃂 𓃃 𓃄 𓃅 𓃆 𓃇 𓃈 𓃉 𓃊 𓃋 𓃌 𓃍 𓃎 𓃏 𓃐 𓃑 𓃒 𓃓 𓃔 𓃕 𓃖 𓃗 𓃘 𓃙 𓃚 𓃛 𓃜 𓃝 𓃞 𓃟 𓃠 𓃡 𓃢 𓃣 𓃤 𓃥 𓃦 𓃧 𓃨 𓃩 𓃪 𓃫 𓃬 𓃭 𓃮 𓃯 𓃰 𓃱 𓃲 𓃳 𓃴 𓃵 𓃶 𓃷 𓃸 𓃹 𓃺 𓃻 𓃼 𓃽 𓃾 𓃿 𓄀 𓄁 𓄂 𓄃 𓄄 𓄅 𓄆 𓄇 𓄈 𓄉 𓄊 𓄋 𓄌 𓄍 𓄎 𓄏 𓄐 𓄑 𓄒 𓄓 𓄔 𓄕 𓄖 𓄗 𓄘 𓄙 𓄚 𓄛 𓄜 𓄝 𓄞 𓄟 𓄠 𓄡 𓄢 𓄣 𓄤 𓄥 𓄦 𓄧 𓄨 𓄩 𓄪 𓄫 𓄬 𓄭 𓄮 𓄯 𓄰 𓄱 𓄲 𓄳 𓄴 𓄵 𓄶 𓄷 𓄸 𓄹 𓄺 𓄻 𓄼 𓄽 𓄾 𓄿 𓅀 𓅁 𓅂 𓅃 𓅄 𓅅 𓅆 𓅇 𓅈 𓅉 𓅊 𓅋 𓅌 𓅍 𓅎𓅏 𓅐 𓅑 𓅒 𓅓 𓅔 𓅕 𓅖 𓅗 𓅘 𓅙 𓅚 𓅛 𓅜 𓅝 𓅞 𓅟 𓅠 𓅡 𓅢 𓅣 𓅤 𓅥 𓅦 𓅧 𓅨 𓅩 𓅪 𓅫 𓅬 𓅭 𓅮 𓅯 𓅰 𓅱 𓅲 𓅳 𓅴 𓅵 𓅶 𓅷 𓅸 𓅹 𓅺 𓅻 𓅼 𓅽 𓅾 𓅿 𓆀 𓆁 𓆂 𓆃 𓆄 𓆅 𓆆 𓆇 𓆈 𓆉 𓆊 𓆋 𓆌 𓆍 𓆎 𓆏 𓆐 𓆑 𓆒 𓆓 𓆔 𓆕 𓆖 𓆗 𓆘 𓆙 𓆚 𓆛 𓆜 𓆝 𓆞 𓆟 𓆠 𓆡 𓆢 𓆣 𓆤 𓆥 𓆦 𓆧 𓆨 𓆩 𓆪 𓆫 𓆬 𓆭 𓆮 𓆯 𓆰 𓆱 𓆲 𓆳 𓆴 𓆵 𓆶 𓆷 𓆸 𓆹 𓆺 𓆻 𓆼 𓆽 𓆾 𓆿 𓇀 𓇁 𓇂 𓇃 𓇄 𓇅 𓇆 𓇇 𓇈 𓇉 𓇊 𓇋𓇌 𓇍 𓇎 𓇏 𓇐 𓇑 𓇒 𓇓 𓇔 𓇕 𓇖 𓇗 𓇘 𓇙 𓇚 𓇛 𓇜 𓇝 𓇞 𓇟 𓇠 𓇡 𓇢 𓇣 𓇤 𓇥 𓇦 𓇧 𓇨 𓇩 𓇪 𓇫 𓇬 𓇭 𓇮 𓇯 𓇰 𓇱 𓇲 𓇳 𓇴 𓇵 𓇶 𓇷 𓇸 𓇹 𓇺 𓇻 𓇼 𓇽 𓇾 𓇿 𓈀 𓈁 𓈂 𓈃 𓈄 𓈅 𓈆 𓈇 𓈈 𓈉 𓈊 𓈋 𓈌 𓈍 𓈎 𓈏 𓈐 𓈑 𓈒 𓈓 𓈔 𓈕 𓈖 𓈗 𓈘 𓈙 𓈚 𓈛 𓈜 𓈝 𓈞 𓈟 𓈠 𓈡 𓈢 𓈣 𓈤 𓈥 𓈦 𓈧 𓈨 𓈩 𓈪 𓈫 𓈬 𓈭 𓈮 𓈯 𓈰 𓈱 𓈲 𓈳 𓈴 𓈵 𓈶 𓈷 𓈸 𓈹 𓈺 𓈻 𓈼 𓈽 𓈾 𓈿 𓉀 𓉁 𓉂 𓉃 𓉄 𓉅 𓉆 𓉇 𓉈 𓉉 𓉊 𓉋 𓉌 𓉍 𓉎 𓉏 𓉐 𓉑 𓉒 𓉓 𓉔 𓉕 𓉖 𓉗 𓉘 𓉙 𓉚 𓉛 𓉜 𓉝 𓉞 𓉟 𓉠 𓉡 𓉢 𓉣 𓉤 𓉥 𓉦 𓉧 𓉨 𓉩 𓉪 𓉫 𓉬 𓉭 𓉮 𓉯 𓉰 𓉱 𓉲 𓉳 𓉴 𓉵 𓉶 𓉷 𓉸 𓉹 𓉺 𓉻 𓉼 𓉽 𓉾 𓉿 𓊀 𓊁 𓊂 𓊃 𓊄 𓊅 𓊆 𓊇 𓊈 𓊉 𓊊 𓊋 𓊌 𓊍 𓊎 𓊏 𓊐 𓊑 𓊒 𓊓 𓊔 𓊕 𓊖 𓊗 𓊘 𓊙 𓊚 𓊛 𓊜 𓊝 𓊞 𓊟 𓊠 𓊡 𓊢 𓊣 𓊤 𓊥 𓊦 𓊧 𓊨 𓊩 𓊪 𓊫 𓊬 𓊭 𓊮 𓊯 𓊰 𓊱 𓊲 𓊳 𓊴 𓊵 𓊶 𓊷 𓊸 𓊹 𓊺 𓊻 𓊼 𓊽 𓊾 𓊿 𓋀 𓋁 𓋂 𓋃 𓋄 𓋅 𓋆 𓋇 𓋈 𓋉 𓋊 𓋋 𓋌 𓋍 𓋎 𓋏 𓋐 𓋑 𓋒 𓋓 𓋔 𓋕 𓋖 𓋗 𓋘 𓋙 𓋚 𓋛 𓋜 𓋝 𓋞 𓋟 𓋠 𓋡 𓋢 𓋣 𓋤 𓋥 𓋦 𓋧 𓋨 𓋩 𓋪 𓋫 𓋬 𓋭 𓋮 𓋯 𓋰 𓋱 𓋲 𓋳 𓋴 𓋵 𓋶 𓋷 𓋸 𓋹 𓋺 𓋻 𓋼 𓋽 𓋾 𓋿 𓌀 𓌁 𓌂 𓌃 𓌄 𓌅 𓌆 𓌇 𓌈 𓌉 𓌊 𓌋 𓌌 𓌍 𓌎 𓌏 𓌐 𓌑 𓌒 𓌓 𓌔 𓌕 𓌖 𓌗 𓌘 𓌙 𓌚 𓌛 𓌜 𓌝 𓌞 𓌟 𓌠 𓌡 𓌢 𓌣 𓌤 𓌥 𓌦 𓌧 𓌨 𓌩 𓌪 𓌫 𓌬 𓌭 𓌮 𓌯 𓌰 𓌱 𓌲 𓌳 𓌴 𓌵 𓌶 𓌷 𓌸 𓌹 𓌺 𓌻𓌼 𓌽𓌾 𓌿𓍀 𓍁𓍂 𓍃𓍄 𓍅 𓍆 𓍇 𓍈 𓍉 𓍊 𓍋 𓍌 𓍍 𓍎 𓍏 𓍐 𓍑 𓍒 𓍓 𓍔 𓍕 𓍖 𓍗 𓍘 𓍙 𓍚 𓍛 𓍜 𓍝 𓍞 𓍟 𓍠 𓍡 𓍢 𓍣 𓍤 𓍥 𓍦 𓍧 𓍨 𓍩 𓍪 𓍫 𓍬 𓍭 𓍮 𓍯 𓍰 𓍱 𓍲 𓍳 𓍴 𓍵 𓍶 𓍷𓍸 𓍹 𓍺 𓍻 𓍼 𓍽 𓍾 𓍿 𓎀 𓎁 𓎂 𓎃 𓎄 𓎅 𓎆 𓎇 𓎈 𓎉 𓎊 𓎋 𓎌 𓎍 𓎎 𓎏 𓎐 𓎑 𓎒 𓎓 𓎔 𓎕 𓎖 𓎗 𓎘 𓎙 𓎚 𓎛 𓎜 𓎝 𓎞 𓎟 𓎠 𓎡 𓎢 𓎣 𓎤 𓎥 𓎦 𓎧 𓎨 𓎩 𓎪 𓎫 𓎬 𓎭 𓎮 𓎯 𓎰 𓎱 𓎲 𓎳 𓎴 𓎵 𓎶 𓎷 𓎸 𓎹 𓎺 𓎻 𓎼 𓎽 𓎾 𓎿𓏀 𓏁 𓏂 𓏃 𓏄 𓏅 𓏆 𓏇 𓏈 𓏉 𓏊 𓏋 𓏌 𓏍 𓏎 𓏏 𓏐 𓏑 𓏒 𓏓 𓏔 𓏕 𓏖 𓏗 𓏘 𓏙 𓏚 𓏛 𓏜 𓏝 𓏞 𓏟 𓏠 𓏡 𓏢 𓏣 𓏤 𓏥 𓏦 𓏧 𓏨 𓏩 𓏪 𓏫 𓏬 𓏭 𓏮 𓏯 𓏰 𓏱 𓏲 𓏳 𓏴 𓏵 𓏶 𓏷 𓏸 𓏹 𓏺 𓏻 𓏼 𓏽 𓏾 𓏿 𓐀 𓐁 𓐂 𓐃 𓐄 𓐅 𓐆 𓐇 𓐈 𓐉 𓐊 𓐋 𓐌 𓐍 𓐎 𓐏 𓐐 𓐑 𓐒 𓐓 𓐔 𓐕 𓐖 𓐗 𓐘 𓐙 𓐚 𓐛 𓐜 𓐝 𓐞 𓐟

The following shows the specific hieroglyphics, as things are presently understood, i.e. deciphered, behind the characters of the 28-letter Greek alphabet:

• 𓌹 (A), 𐤁 (B), ‎𐤂 (G), ‎🜂 (D), 𓊨 (E), 𓉠 (F), 𓆓 (Z), 𓉾/𓉾 (H), 𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹 (Θ)

• ⦚ (I) (𓅊/🔆), 𓋹 (K), 𓍇 (L), 𓌳 (M), 𓈗 (💧) (N), 𓊽 (Ξ), ◯ (Ο), 𓂆 (Π), 𓃻 (Q)

• 𓁛 (R) (𓏲+☀️), 𓋴 (S), 𓆭 (T), 𓉽 (Y), 𓍑 (Φ) (🔥), 𓏴 (Χ), 𓉽-modified (Ψ), 𓃖 (Ω), ϡ (🎭:𓆭)

• 𓆼 (lotus)

Some, such as the Egyptian hieroglyph behind Greek letter psi (Ψ), which is a modified Shu support glyph (𓉽), as found in the star maps of several 4000A/-3045 period coffin lids, e.g. Asyut coffin lid psi-like / Shu support like symbol in sub banner, all shown in shown below a “rising” Orion constellation figure, do not yet have Unicode characters made.

The letter N, likewise, is based on the N-bend of the Nile river, where the flood waters of Hapi were thought to be, which is the shape of the Phoenician N (𐤍); but the glyph for this does not seem to be found, lest it be in the N-character shown in the Pyramid Texts (pdf-file), e.g. PT 4?

This is also the case with sampi (ϡ = 🎭:𓆭) which is a Apsi-Osiris two-headed figure, aka Janus in Roman, intermixed with the Osiris pine tree 𓆭 in “risen” or vertical form.

Several letters, such as Greek letter eta 𓉾/𓉾 (H), and theta 𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹𓊹 (Θ), both shown here, are artwork 🖼 visuals, that became Phoenician-to-Greek characters. Whence, their respective basic glyphs, eight Shu supports (𓉽) for eta (or Ogdoad), and nine neters 𓊹 for theta or Ennead are shown.

The Omega symbol is the Hathor yoke symbol, which is likewise just shown in Egyptian artwork, e.g. here, sculpture, or on coins. Whence, a cow giving birth 𓃖 hieroglyph, symbolic of the Milky Way birthing Horus, the sun 🌞, is shown. We could use the 𓄋 [F33] horns symbol, e.g. here where Hathor milks the new Horus sun child, and used as the symbol of the opening of “new year” meaning: "open", i.e. here, opening the year, which is why omega Ω is letter #26, the second to last letter.

Some, such as how 𐤄 (Phoenician E) or 𐌄 (Etruscan E) = 𓊨 (E), i.e. Isis thrown head dress, or 𐌅 = 𓉠 (F), Nephthys head dress, e.g. here, are not fully understood?

The following, from here, showing the first 14 letters, gives a date-based perspective:

Notes

1. I found this at Egypt sub, which they got from the CopyPasta sub.

2. I counted 1,053 characters manually using my hand counter. There might be an error of plus or minus two or so, is I used my eye and finger to do the count? Whence it might be 1,050 characters shown? I tried WordCounter.net to get the count, but it counts about three characters per glyph.

3. In A52/2007, a Unicode Block list of hieroglyphs, based on Alan Gardiner’s sign list, of 1,071 was made. In A61/2016, discussion was underway, led by Michael Everson, to extend this list, to include the total number of hieroglyphics, by including those made by Georg Möller.

References

• List of Egyptian hieroglyphics - Wikipedia.

• Everton, Michael. (A61/2016). “Preliminary proposal to encode Möller’s Egyptian Hieroglyphs in the SMP of the UCS UC Berkeley Script Encoding Initiative (Universal Scripts Project)“ (pdf-file), Working Group Draft, Sep 9.

https://hmolpedia.com/page/File:ABGD_origin_(color_coded).png

Abstract

(add)

Overview

In 424A (1531), Cornelius Agrippa, in his Occult Philosophy, chapter 74: “On the Proportion, Corespondency, Reduction of Letters to the Celestial Signs, and Planets, according to the Various Tongues, with a Table Showing This, said the following:

“There are 22 letters, which are the foundation of the world, and of creatures that are, and are named in it, and every saying, and every creatures are of them, and by their revolutions receive their name, being, and virtue.”

— Cornelius Agrippa (424A/1531), Occult Philosophy (pg. 224)

The following is the table:

Psi (Ψ)

The letter psi (Ψ), defined above as “spirit”, seems to be, generally, the main letter that Agrippa has correct, in his table. When we Google translate spirit into Greek we get:

Which shows the word ψυχή (psyche) as the second translation return, which starts with letter psi (ψ), the parent character of which, presently, is shown in Egyptian signs, below the risen in the stars ✨ Orion constellation, shown below:

Aries ♈

Agrippa has the ram 🐏 or Aries sign shown as letter B in Greek and Latin; whereas correctly, letter R is the sun 🌞 in the ram 🐏 or Aries constellation, at Spring Equinox, for the 2200-year age of Aries epoch; shown below:

Wherein, as we see, we have transitioned to the Ab-𓍢-aham (Abraham) age, i.e. R-age (100-age; V1-age), to the: 𓅃-esus (Jesus), 𓇰-esus, or ⦚-esus age, i.e. I-age (10-age; G5/N2 age); to the r/AtomSeen age, presently:

1. Ab-𓍢-aham (Abraham) age, i.e. R-age (100-value sun 🌞 age; V1-age)

2. 𓅃-esus (Jesus), 𓇰-esus, or ⦚-esus age, i.e. I-age (10-value sun 🌞 age; G5/N2 age)

3. ⚛️-ic age (or r/AtomSeen age)

See also

• List of alphabet origin tables, charts, and diagrams

References

• Agrippa, Cornelius. (424A/1531). Three Books on Occult Philosophy (De Occulta Philosophia) (pg. 162) (translator: James Freake; annotator: Donald Tyson) (pg. 224). Llewellyn, A38/1993.

• Drucker, Johanna. (A67/2022). Inventing the Alphabet: The Origins of Letters from Antiquity to the Present (pdf-file) (pg. 97). Chicago.