Back in 2004, Steve Farmer and colleagues wrote a paper that pretty much shocked the world (or at least that sliver of the world that includes archaeology geeks), claiming that the Indus script was in fact not a language, because it has some unusual characteristics and none of the glyph lists are long enough to represent sentences.
But in a Science Express paper published today, Ranesh P. N. Rao and colleagues provide evidence that the Indus script really does represent language. And yippee! They also included five very nice photographs of Indus seals for us media types, and, of course, I had to build a photo essay to get a good look at them, and to discuss the background and work of this fascinating subject.
Stamp seal, 4500 BP, with Indus script. Image courtesy of J.M. Kenoyer / Harappa.com
The ancient Indus Civilization took up 1.6 million square kilometers of eastern Pakistan and northwestern India between about 2500 and 1900 BC. It had huge cities like Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa and villages like Nausharo; it had a sophisticated copper/bronze industry; and the farmers grew wheat and barley and rice and cattle and sheep, goats and chickens. And it had a distinctive script found on seals and pottery and tools—but a current controversy questions whether that script was a full language or merely a set of symbols.
Top Related Searches ancient indus civilization mohenjo daro and harappa richard sproat michael witzel indus seals sheep goats
Explore Archaeology
Comments
Dear Kris,
On the new paper in Science claiming that it is “proven” statistically that the Indus symbols were part of a writing system: don’t believe everything you read in Science until everything relevant is published. :^) In fact, key data in the paper (which attempted to refute the earlier work by me, the computational linguist Richard Sproat, and Michael Witzel at Harvard) is made up. See now our “Refutation of the Claimed Refutation” at
http://www.safarmer.com/Refutation3.pdf
Enjoy!
Steve Farmer
In their earlier (2004) paper, Farmer et al state that Achaemenids introduced literacy into India, following their conquests in NW South Asia.
Yet there isn’t a ~single~ long inscription on durable materials from NW South Asia dating from the maximum possible period of Achaemenid rule in Gandhara (c 500 BC to 327/6 BC).
That would appear to conflict the statement in the refutation above, viz
“The speculation was spurious: we know of hundreds of literate societies, but not of one that wrote long texts on perishable materials but failed to do so as well on durable goods.”
Half a Language is better than none if your mixture of cultures.
How ever I see clear indecation of symbols used as a means of communicating an Idea, or train of thought, Thus a Language parse as we define it.
You claim their are not enough strings to formulate a complete sentence.
Is your assumption, that in 2500 BC. the people spoke with the sentencestructure of Man in the, 18th or 20th century.
Probabley not. Re think your smarts there.
Here’s some additional commentary from Dienekes:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2009/04/indus-script-encoded-language-not.html
There is a new piece of discovery on Harappan Civilization by Jha. It is available on following link site. It demonstrates how the Civilization was known to Brahmi and Mahabharata. This is a challenging but new discovery. Jha has identified 22 inscriptions
written in Brahmi, which is on the way to publication:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/16166433/NEW-DISCOVERY-ON-HARAPPAN-CIVILIZATION-WITH-A-NOTE-ON-FLOWING-SARASVATI-RIVER-
Much has been discussed on this topic, and even this comment line is now cold. But one must wonder why ancient people would create relatively hundreds of pretty abstract meaningless symbols. Did they have nothing better to do? On the number and repetitiveness of signs, there should be comparison with the Mayan script (e.g. Kopan in Honduras). Also one must think of contacts and distances of that time. How often and how many people really come into contact with each other? the current multitude of indian scripts shows that signs get modified and become even unrecognizeable within 100 years.
As for the existence of longer texts, there are later references to this. Megasthenes in the court of Chandagupta Mauryan wrote that the indians wrote on bank and tightly woven cloth. There is no reason why this should not have taken place earlier. When the Indians came into contact with the Greeks and learned to write on rocks, the Brahmi script appeared all of a sudden. Clearly it had evolved at some earlier period.
As for Mr. Jha’s interpretation of coins from Shimla, it’s good to hear other more politically independent opinions.
the ivc was in many repsects the most literate among old world civilizations.
there was literacy in the gangetic plains too from 1500 BC
Please find my complete solution for the so-called Aryan problem.. please use this as a template to bring Indology into the 21st century.. there is plenty of work to be done..
Part one is a high level overview. Part two is much more interesting
This is one of the longest research papers published in a peer-reviewed journal since independance.
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/27103044/Sujay-NPAP-Part-One
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/27105677/Sujay-Npap-Part-Two
> Mirror:
> http://www.docstoc.com/docs/25880426/Sujay-NPAP-Part-One
> http://www.docstoc.com/docs/25865304/SUJAY-NPAP-Part-Two
Part one – Basic model with proof
> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1324506
> Part Two detailed model with conclusions (Must read)
> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1541822
Even those who beleive that the Indus script was not closely tied to speech agree that the Indus valley was, in many respects, the msot literate civilization in the ancient world with literacy levels far beyond what was acheived in Mesopotamia or Egypt. this can be inferred from the ubiquity of the script, the presence of signboards, large number of inscriptions etc. It was a common man’s civilization and there is no known evidence of Royal Authority. They had many acheivements in Engineering and Urban development which surpassed those of Mesopotamia or Egypt.
It was four times the size or Egypt/Mesopotamia, & had larger cities than either. About the question of whether there was an additional script or not which was used by a small number of people, for adminstrative usage, we know
(a) less than 10% of the IVC has been excavated
(b) There were contacts with West Asia through out the period of the IVC.
(c) It was four times the size or Egypt/Mesopotamia and was advanced in many ways. Even those who beleive that it was not closely tied to speech beleive that cunieform was intentionally not imported. By the same reckoning, it could have been.
(d) There was remarkable uniformity over an extremely large area and is it amazing how this uniformity was achieved in Eighty years. While pre-IVc cultures were highly localized a remarkable level of homogeneity was enforced with breathtaking rapidity in eighty years over an area that was nearly half the size of Modern India.. remember the primitive transportantion systems way back then…
(e) It could have been used by smaller groups of people on perishable or non=perishable materials or both
We would also hope, research on the Gangetic plains – between 1900 Bc and 600 BC becomes mainstream..
We have opinions of large number of mainstream and western scholars that there were a large number
of cities and towns there and there was literacy in the Gangetic plains too. There are many practical difficulties in researching the Gangetic plains and India specific research strategies must be the starting point… Unless there is a collaborative approach between western and Indian scientists, the entire field is doomed. if this is done, we will be greatly adding to human knowledge.
Sujay Rao Mandavilli
(a) Logographic scripts which are not tightly bound to speech were suitable for ancient trade based civilizations
(b) Logographic scripts which are not tightly bound to speech were suitable for multi-ethnic civilizations like the Indus
(c) Logographic scripts can permit mass-literacy or mass quasi-literacy
(d) Since 5-10% of the IVC is excavated and there are 4000 examples of the indus script on seals, signboards, this gives an average of one example
per 125 people which is unheard of old world civilizations and far in excess of other civilizations
(e) Cuneiform would have been suitable where a script was imposed by royal authority
(f) Primarily non-linguistic systems can have a liguistic component
(g) The ‘lost manuscript hypothesis’ can be in another script , not necessarily in the same script. It could have been used by small groups of people
(h) An amazing fact is how a remarkable homogeneity spread over a 1.5 million square kilometres in less than 100 years. How did this happen?
Sujay Rao Mandavilli
Hatailor is correct .. many archeologists now agree that there were large cities in the Gangetic plains between 1900 BC and 600 BC- this must become the next hot topic of research. The script in some sites in the Gangetic plains c 1500 BC did not evolve from the indus script but was imported from West Asia. They were alphabetic. Taxila was a centre of learning 600 BC. New evidence for scripts in other places from 600 BC in India.
Even if a small linguistic component is added – rebus principle or punning (Witzel Kyoto, 2009 or Sproat in his presentations) or acriphony is added, it qualifies for full literacy. I assume some ‘sound coding’ would have been useful to them atleast on some occasions.. the longest seal is 17 characters non-analomous and 26 characters analomous. I have never said that what Farmer is saying is necessarily fully wrong, but even Parpola has been reading them mostly as logograms with a linguistic component. So how much of what Farmer is saying is new apart from the fact that he popularized the idea? These men have been saying almost the same thing and fighting with each other?Till 2900 BC Egypt and Mesopotamia were considered proto-literate even if their texts are shorter(not non-literate!!!!)- even if there is small difference between the 2 maybe the Indus system was more expressive than Egyptian proto-literate- because conditional entropy, order of signs, combinations probably did play a major role in meaning in the Indus script (Korvink). ????Terminologies pertaining to literacy cannot be changed unless all scholars agree – and any demands to change terminology must be met with suspicion, naturally. Only a very small portion of the IVC has been excavated, you know, 5% maybe! Even Farmer agrees “Judging from modern examples and research in the linguistic history of South Asia, the Indus Valley was probably intensely multi linguistic throughout its history. This may have provided the Indus emblem system with an advantage over ordinary writing as a means of providing the civilization with social cohesion. The fact that the majority of inscriptions rely on a surprisingly small core of symbols suggests that the meaning of Indus signs could have potentially been known by almost or all (ALL!!) of the population, resulting in a pervasive quasiliteracy far beyond that achieved in Mesopotamia or Egypt.” No other civlization mass produced writing or (“writing”!!). Where else did they have public signboards then apart from the Indus?
I can instead cite Farmer and declare it the most literate civilization on erth. And he and I could be saying the same thing. I say such terms must be avoided.
Making fun of ancient people is absolutely disgraceful.
Sujay Rao Mandavilli
The Harappans had the oldest “signboard” in the world, apparently. They mass produced writing (or “writing”) . According to Parpola, 1/10th of
Mohendodaro (100 square metres) has yielded 2100 seals (with 9000 characters?). Or more than one character per person. I declare the Indus the most literate civilization on earth as every body could ‘read and write’ – Farmer.
This makes the debate so shallow it is nearly ridiculous. After all what then is the difference beteween the Indus and civilizations which did not yield any trace of writing? History is a subject after all and is taught everywhere in the world. Don’t mislead people deliberately and try to deceive them! We hate those who misrepresent history.
please find the article below. My comment is at the end.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/war-of-words-in-the-cradle-of-south-asian-civilisation-1927005.html
Somehow I doubt this this post will be the last word on the subject of Harappan script, but please read the linked article:
http://decipherquarterly.piczo.com/?cr=2
Please see the linked ‘Indus Script Dictionary’ for a better organized collection of material than the previous site I linked:
http://harappanwriting.piczo.com
Pleased to announce the publication of my paper ‘The reconfirmation and reinforcement of the Indus script’ . This shows why the Indus script was a logo-syllabic script and longer texts certainly existed in the Indus. This shows why Sproat’s smoking gun is wholly invalid. If Farmer chooses to disagree with me, he has to reply to me point by point. Back to square one
http://www.scribd.com/doc/46387240/Sujay-Indus-Script-Final-Version-Final-Final
sujayrao2000 (signed in using yahoo)
INDUS SCRIPT WAS TRUE WRITING.
Please find my two papers below and circulate amongst the skeptics, particularly!
To state the obvious, the Indus script was a logo-syllabic script and a lost corpus did exist.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/46387240/Sujay-Indus-Script-Final-Version-Final-Final
Published in the ICFAI journal of history and culture, January 2011.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/111707419/Sujay-Indus-Reintroducing-Lost-Manuscript-Hypothesis
Published in International journal of philosophy and journal sciences , November 2012.
I am also introducing logo-syllabic thesis B in this paper.
…
The paper is very self-explanatory!
does anybody still beg to differ?
Sujay Rao Mandavilli.
Indus script is not a language but a script and was used as script by other languages. Sumerian language is written in this script. Vedic Sanskrit was written in this script as can be seen in ‘Nirukta’ written by Yaska sometime in 18th century. We find that the names of signs of the script as given in Sumerian are also found in Nirukta and gives them as examples in Vedas. It was a script and must be treated as a script, not as a language.
Gyan Swarup Gupta
Indus script was not a language but only an script and was used by sumerian language. It was used in writing Vedas as can be seen in Nirukta (written by Yaska in 18th century). Nirukta was giving the script and as examples was giving from Vedas.
Gyan Swarup Gupta
i am pleased to announce the publication of my fifth research paper in a peer-reviewed journal
this deals with the origin of Brahmi . this is a logical and self-explanatory paper and is written using a multi-disciplinary approach. it is written in such a way that anybody can cross-verify the conclusions.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/127306265/Sujay-Post-Harappan-Literacy-Final-Final-Final
sujay rao mandavilli
please find all my 6 papers
The Demise of the Dravidian, Vedic and Paramunda Indus myths
I am publishing my sixth research paper directly online as it is an extension of my previous papers. Kindly read pages 4 to 18 as it contains a detailed discussion of the term ‘Aryan’. This paper shows why the Dravidian, Vedic and Paramunda Indus theories are not tenable.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/136268397/The-demise-of-the-Dravidian-Vedic-and-Paramunda-Indus-myths
Methods to reconstruct the languages of the Harappans were presented in the present and previous papers. We hope other scholars take up the exercise of reconstructing the languages of the Indus Valley civilization!
Part one
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27103044/Sujay-NPAP-Part-One
Part Two very,very important!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/27105677/Sujay-Npap-Part-Two
(These comprise the complete and comprehensive solution to the Aryan problem)
Literacy in pre-Buddhist India (before 600 BC)
Please find my collection of papers on literacy in Pre-Buddhist India
Indus valley civilization (2600 BC to 1900 BC)
1. The reconfirmation and reinforcement of the Indus script thesis (very logical and self explanatory paper)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/46387240/Sujay-Indus-Script-Final-Version-Final-Final
2. The reintroduction of the lost manuscript hypothesis (the case for this thesis has obviously become much stronger in the recent past)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/111707419/Sujay-Indus-Reintroducing-Lost-Manuscript-Hypothesis
Post-Harappan India (1600 BC to 600 BC)
1. Literacy in post-Harappan india (obviously literacy in post-Harappan India existed in certain pockets & were limited to very small sections of society- alphabetic scripts were brought from West Asia and the Indus script also continued – this a very logical and self-explanatory paper and anyone can cross-verify the conclusions)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/127306265/Sujay-Post-Harappan-Literacy-and-origin-of-Brahmi