Standards & Definitions
Given the fact that every decipherment problem is embedded in its own archaeological and linguistic sphere, and, as a consequence, has developed its own specific terminology and code cracking aproach, no cross-linguistic methodology has been established upt to date. After years of publishing scientific papers on particular writing systems, GEAS team members and cheerleaders estimate that more than 90 % of all decipherment proposals published in scientific papers are so-called dead end attempts or “bunkers”, i.e. may seem to be coherent, successfull decipherments in itself, but are not anchored in either external (mathematical, archaeological, or linguistic) evidence, nor in a quantitative-linguistic methodology established independently from the writing system in question.
Researchers affiliated to GEAS will either a) fully embrace the GEAS methodology, or b) will justify every single deviation from it, adducing literature from peer-reviewed journals. In case of b), the GEAS Consortium will decide in which way and to what extent the findings arising from a specific writing system will be incorporated into GEAS Guidelines.
GEAS Richtlinien__Guidelines (by: GEAS Consortium)
GEAS Methodology for Statistical Script Comparison (by: Erin Rickenbach, Michael Mäder)
[NEW: Typology of historical script adoption] (by: Michael Mäder, Annick Payne)