
Boustrophedon Order - hardy263
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boustrophedon
======
mikeknoop
According to the Wikipedia image, the "backwards" row (from right to left) was
not only written from right-to-left, but the characters were also inversed
horizontally
([http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/Bou...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/Boustrophedon.svg/400px-
Boustrophedon.svg.png))

I can understand the mentality behind alternating rows, especially on non-
uniform surfaces but inversing the characters seems like more effort than what
it's worth. Can anyone explain this further?

~~~
rfreytag
I recall that the Moai (<https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Moai>)
were transported horizontally quite a ways from their quarry to their
pediments. >IF< the inscriptions are on these prone stones then perhaps it was
so that two stone carvers could carve two lines simultaneously thereby halving
the time to complete their work. By inverting the second line the second
carver doesn't have to write upside down. The carvers just face each other
while squatting on the stone's face and start at opposite sides of the face
working past each other.

If this style of inscription occurs frequently on stone surfaces not likely to
be transported then this theory is unlikely.

EDIT: answering the reply below - the above technique can be applied to any
number of lines. As in pipeline processing for vector computers
([https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Pipeline_%28s...](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Pipeline_%28software%29))
the last operations do not fully utilize the available capacity of the system.
In the case of inscribing in stone - the last line only needs the labor of one
carver.

As for frustrating - I'd find carving in stone quite tedious in any case.

I may still be mistaken but I don't think it's for the reasons you gave.

~~~
mfukar
That's not practical at all. It could be applied only for an odd number of
lines, if they even happened to know in advance how many lines it'd take.
Also, it'd be amazingly frustrating: imagine having to "switch" your focus
from the start of the text to the end, and then a little further from the
start, and then a little further from the end...

I don't think our ancestors were masochists or dumb, really.

~~~
gwern
> It could be applied only for an odd number of lines, if they even happened
> to know in advance how many lines it'd take.

I think when you are working in _stone_ , you have your text prepared in
advance.

(But what do I know? Just the other day, I took a week and dashed down my
grocery list on some granite. Turned out to be an even number of lines.)

~~~
mfukar
Hey, I might be horribly wrong. It's not like I can put myself in their
position.

It certainly isn't the first or last thing about ancient times that we come up
with half-witted explanations for..

------
philologist
Remember that word spacing was invented only in the 12th century.
Ifyoutrytoreadseverallinesoftextwrittenlikethis, you'll quickly find that you
lose track of where you are in the text fairly often. That's why Boustrophedon
was invented and used, and that's why it became definitely obsolete after word
spacing was invented.

You can read more about this in Paul Saenger's and Frances Yates' books.

------
motters
I'm not surprised that this method of writing didn't catch on, since it could
be quite confusing. It would tend to minimize saccade distances when reading,
but the down side is that you need to memorize 2N characters (normal and
mirrored versions) plus you also need to memorize which is the current reading
direction.

------
mwerty
maybe an effective way to parallelize writes?

