Tim Partridge wrote:

> I would agree we are nowhere near a full decipherment. In my view Fischer
> seems to extend his theory to a wider range of inscriptions than perhaps

is

> warrented. I am also rather wary of procreation chants which have

seemingly

> unconnected combinations of parent and child. If such combinations can be
> independently supported by evidence from say, a verbal tradition, that is
> fine. If not there is a danger of inventing something completely spurious
> which is unverifiable.

I agree completely. I was simply astonished at what Fischer was passing off
as a 'decipherment' (which says a lot about the rudimentary state of
rongorongo studies). But then again, I suppose I shouldn't be exceedingly
surprised, since he has also 'deciphered' the Phaistos Disk.

Stephen Chrisomalis
Department of Anthropology, McGill University
schris1@...