(Subject: markings on a stone found in the Oak Island pit, ostensibly Coptic. I'm requesting an exact copy if extant.)
In trying to track this "stones'-markings-interchange" I'm a bit confused and hope someone can weigh in: "Does anyone have a copy of the script apparently judged as Coptic by early scholars?"
The info re a possible Phoenician application begins to indicate that maybe the "scholars" in the beginning did not know Coptic from anything else ...(?) which is hard to imagine but then, I'm always suspicious. It would be very interesting to see an exact copy of the original markings if such exists.
My own interest relates to the protosiniatic version of Hebrew. It is my belief that the Sinclair Templars/Masons may have used this version of Hebrew script which uses glyphs, largely geometric, relating to the energetic dynamics of the grid system they used in major temples (Chartres, Rosslyn, Montserrat, etc.) and earth grids. Their grid dynamics predate 16th Century CE free booting privateers or pirates and this system was used by Masons on up into the late 18th Century. (It was secret at the time so no record is found other than in examples of their construction and other applications... which I'm now studying.) Apparently the present Masons have lost the codes.
This system ("Reshel") exists in Nova Scotia; about five persons have independently discovered most of the grid including its duplication in the Canadian and US East Coast. If we could do this then it would be entirely logical that earlier persons, particularly Masons, could "read the grids" and understand Oak Island's function. Protosiniatic Hebrew has the grid code and has obviously spanned the ages, since about 1500 BCE, so it is possible that it might have been used mixed in with other markings. I could determine this if I could see the original exact copy.
In the event Coptic script is used it might also be possible that original Hebrew is encoded. An example of this is the situation now where the Christian scriptures in English overlays Greek which is overlaying the original Hebrew (that was itself encoded).
Just a thought in passing. (I checked the geezfont reference... no resemblance between Coptic and protosiniatic Hebrew script.)
Bruce Carlyon wrote:
"Lastly, I do not read Coptic, but my information is the copy of the markings on the stone are actually Phoenician. >From memory, is coptic more of a flowing script, where Phoenician is angular Letters."
"Sorry, Bruce: Coptic is not more of a flowing script. I'm married to an
eritrean woman, the alphabet of their language (Tigrinya) IS the coptic
alphabet. I see it every day. It's not a flowing script, actually it looks
like something in between hebrew and demotic. Lastly: The coptic script is
actually called Ge'ez.
"If you'd like to see a sample, go to the following link to get info on Ge'ez
support software for computers. http://www.geezfont.com/