~{ ,"r......

~_Lu 5 ~ .

Reprinted from Harappan Civilization

Edited by GREGORY L. POSSEHL

OXFORD & lBH PUBLISHING CO. New Delhi Bombay Calcutta _ \ Ii' L IRA V ATHAM MAHADEVAN

29. Terminal Ideograms in the Indus Script

THE study of the Indus script has cOme of age with the direct borrowing or common descent. Pictograms and publication of two comprehensive, computerized ideograms, hy their very nature, are bound to have concordances which cover between them the entire resemblances even i.f tbey belong to different and known inscriptional material of the Harappan Civili­ independent writing systems. Sign sequences in the zation (Parpola et al., 1973, 1979; Ma.hadevan 1977). Indus script are unique, bearing no relation to any of These concordances present the texts and the rele­ the West Asian scripts. vant background data in a systematic manner, enabl­ 3) The lndus script is /l0/ related to the later ingscholars without direct acceSS to the original mate­ Indian scripts, namely, the Brahm. and the Khora­ rial to undertake analytical studies of the insc riptions sh\hi. The attempts to link fe atures like conjunct­ and to formulate or verify hypotheses regarding the consonants or medial vowel signs of the later Indian nature of the script and the typology of the underlying scripts with the supposedly simil"r [catllres o[ the language. Indus script have not been successful. Some positive results have already emerged aT 4) The most common supposition that the fre ­ been confirmed by analytical studies based on the quent terminal signs of the Indus script represent concordances. The determination of the direction of grammatical suffixes, especially case endings, has nor writing (from right to left) and the segmentation of been confirmed by the concordances. A careful study the texts into probable " words" and " phrases" of the concordances shows that the most frequent through simple word-division techniques are among terminal signs are too closely related to their antece­ the mOre secure results obtained so far (Mahadevan dent signs and sign groups with which they occur in 1977, in press a). terminal positions in all contexts, to be variable case It is. h wever, significant that most of the initial endings. The relationship appears to be semantic resu lts fl owing from a careful study of the con cor- rather than grammatical. d(lfl ccs are negative in cha racter: ", 5) The Harappan language is not related to the I) The Indus script is not alphabetic or quasi­ Indo-European family of languages, as there is no alp habetic, judging from the number of individual evidence for prefixing or inflectional endings in the signs and their functional and distributional charac­ Indus script. Icrisr-ics . 6) The Harappan language is not related to 2) The Indus script is not closely related to any of Sumerian or other West Asian languages which place the contemporary pictographic scripts of the third the attribute after the substantive. The reverse word and the second millennia II.C., even though the Harap­ order of the Harappan language is proved by the pans were in contact with the West Asian cultures and occurrence of the numeraJs before the enumerated there could have beeD diffusion of ideas regarding objects in the Indus script. wri ting systems. The presence of a few common 7) A major negative conclusion emerging from pictograms or ideograms (e.g., ma.n, fish, mountain , an analytical study of tbe concordances is that none of river, rain, city, crossroads, house, plough, etc.) may the published c.Iaims of decipherment of the Indus be traced to such diffusion of ideas rather than to script is valid. Most of the attempts (especially those 3 12 1m va/ham Mahadevall

which assign alphabetic or quasi-alphabetic values to most productive (Knorozov e/ oJ. , 1965, 1968; the signs) can be easily disproved by a simple Parpola el ai., 1969, 1973, 1979; Mahadevan 1977, in comparison of the frequency and distribution charac­ press a; Mahadevan and Visvanathan 1973). It is also teristics of the signs with those of the corresponding at this level that some measurable progress has been values in th e as.o;;um cd models. The morc sophisfi­ achieved in matters li ke determination of the direc­ cated attempts remain , at bcst, nnt proven. tion of writing, word division and delineation of the Shall one conclude therefore that the Indus script broad syntactical features of the texts. These studies cannot be deciphered at aU and that all further seem to indicate that the typology of the Harappan attempts are bound to be futile and a waste of time? language is non-Indo-European and resembles the There are two good reasons why such a wholly pes­ Dravidian languages closely. One has however to simistic attitude should not be adopted. Firstly, it is leave the computer behind at this stage when One 3n axiom of cryptology that, given adequate material, proceeds further to look fo r cl ues to find the meaning no code or ci pher can successfully resist decipher­ of the texts or phonetic values of the signs. ment fo r aU time. This is all the more true of ancient Emil Forrer (1932) pointed out that it was possible undeciphered scripts whose unintelligibility is a to acquire an objective comprehension of the con­ matter of accident rather than design. The corpus of tents of an inscription io an undeciphered script by Harappao inscriptions is growing steadily as new sites the observance of paraHel phenomena. Parallels can are being discovered and the known sites are taken up occur between a symbolic representation and a text again for more intensive excavation. It is, therefore, associated with it, between the written object and its reasonable to hope that in the near future the number designation, or between the written symbol itself and of inscriptions in the Indus script will be large enough its meaning. ParaUe ls can also be set up by observing to leod itself tn normal cryptanalytical procedures. the similarities in the standard form ul ae employed in The possibility that the Harappan language is totally ancient inscriptions. Forrer was able to show that lost without any surviving descendants in the Sub­ such comparisons revealed the basic grammatical fea­ continent is also too remote, considering the vast tures of the writing system even before its linguistic extent and the long duration of the Harappan Civili­ decipherment. zation. Secondly, it is quite likely that the Indian As 1 mentioned earlier, the method of parallel' is historical tradition, wit h its astonishing continuity particularly apt for a study of the Indus script on and vitality, has managed to preserve at least some account of the continuity of the Indian historical tra­ facets of the Lndus Civilization, thus providing valu­ dition. It is probable that even when the Indus script able clues for an understanding of the contents of tbe ceased to be a writing system, some of the more inscriptions in the Indus script. Since the pictorial important ideograms survived and evolved into traili­ motifs associated with these inscriptions, like the tional symbols of various kinds. Such survivals may depiction of Pasupali, phallic symbolism, veneration consist of iconographic elements and other religious of the pipal tree and the serpent are clearly seen to be symbols, royal insignia, emblems on coins and seals, connected with later .Indian tradition, there is no heraldic signs of the nobility, corporate symbols, good reason to deny the possibility of such intercon­ totem signs of clans and tribes and the like. L nection between the contents of the Harappan Pictograms and ideograms of contemporary picto­ inscriptions and the later tradition. graphic scripts may also fum ish valuable clues to the Any serious study of th.e Indus script must begin recognition of the probable objects or meanin gs (but with a formal or structural analysis oUhe texts. Such a not of course the sounds) depicted by similar signs in study will include compilation of a sign li st and a the [Odus script. The comparisons should not be in­ concordance, tabulation of sign frequencies and consistent with the results obtained from the fonnal statistical-positional analyses to determine the nature textual analysis of the inscriptions. of the script and the language. It is also necessary to In one of my earlier papers (Mahadevan 1972) I carry out a context-analysis of the inscriptions with suggested the possibility that parallels drawn from the reference to their background viz.., sites of occur­ Harappan substratum might occur in both the Indo­ rence, stratigraphy, types of inscribed objecL~ and the Aryan and the Dravidian languages. To recapitulate pictorial motifs associated with the inscriptions. It is brieRy, the method of bilingual parallels is based on at this level that the use of the computer has been the fo llowing assumptions: Terminal Ideogram s in Ihe Indus Scr;pl 313

I) T he Har" ppan seals, in accordance with uni­ t hey are found suffi xed. versal usage, gi ve the names and titles of the owners. Jt is also necessary to emphasize here the limita­ It is li kely that due to prolonged bilingual ism and tio ns of the me lhod I p ropose . T he tenlative linguistic racial fusion in the Subcontinent, the more important parallels suggested in this paper arc not to be re­ Hamppan names and ti tl es passed into the later lndo­ ga rd ed as a decipherment of the I ndus script. The Aryan languages as loan words o r loan tran lations. very d ive rsity o f the ta ter Indian parallels wo uld pre­ 2) It is possible that the later symbols, il crived cl ude us fro m assigni ng any specific phonetic values to from the Indus ideograms we re continued to be t he ideograms o f the I ndus script. However I do claim associated, even though in a conventional man ner, that the para ll e ls suggested frnm later Ind ian histori­ with the later fo rms of the older nameS and titles cal trad ilions would enable one to broadly compre­ represented originall y by the Ind us id eograms. hend t l1C p robable original meanings of the i d eo ~ 3) It should bc po sible to undertake a compari­ grams a nd t he ge neral cnnl cnlS of the texis. I readily SOn of such traditiona l symbo ls resembling the signs concede tha t the resu lts a re tentative, even specula­ of the Indus script and names and concepts associated tive. and will require much fu rther study before they with lhem in the [ndian historical trad ition . in an ca n be confirmed. attempt to establish the o rigi nal ideographic mell n­ ings of the signs. THE 'JAR' SIGN : U Before I p roceed to ill ustratc the met hod of bilingual parallels, L musl me nl ion two import(l nt T his is t.he mORt freq ucnl sign of the Indus ·cript. Jt changes ill my lin e of thinkin g in the light of the new ,tccounts for about 1(1 pe rcent o f the total sign occur­ cvidenc(! a vailable from the co ncordancc!i: rence . I t Ca n be established fro m fo rmal analYR is thai [) I now consider that , in the present stale of our the sign occurs as a post-fix . sufiix or delerm in ative at knowledge of the In dus script. it would be mo re pro­ the e nd of the scal lexts whi ch probably give the ductive to sea.-ch for ideogmphic para ll e l. from the names and titles o f the OwnerS ( Huntc r 1934). Thc rate r bi lingm!l Ind ian traditions. rather Ihan look fo r sign see ms to depict a vessel wilh ears or handles (?) ho mo phones or rebus writi ng. T he me thod o f bi lin­ a nd :I tapering hotto m . T he ve-se l fo rm of the sign is gual pa nillcis en ahles one .to extend the sea rch fo r clearly indicated in the naturalistic representations Harappan survi vals to the histo rica l. lite rary and fo und in t 0 graffiti o n potsherds ex c~ l vn t ed fro m an r'cl igi ous trad it ions ava il able in the. Indo-A ryan and early level at Kalibangan (Lal 1974 . IY7S) . the Dravid ian languages. without having to make any The symho li sm o f the JAR is closely associated in a priori a. sump tion, about the nature of the H arap­ the la te r India n religio us tra dition wit h priestly ri tual. pan language o r th e l:H:.:t ual pho netic values of the The legend of the "' jar-ho rn·· sages is ve ry anci ent and signs, which would be implicit in a search for is even found in the Rig"eda (V II: 33) where it is said homophones. I am no t suggesting that the me thod of that Vasis htha and A gastya were norn in a sacreu homopho nes or rebus is inapplicable to the Indus pitche r. The Tamil traditio n ( Pu[am: 2UI) als" re fe rs script; but Inow believe thll t o ne should first exhaust to A gastya, who led the outhem migrati o n of th Ihe possibi lities of finding ideographic parall els to Ve,ir clans fro m Dw:-i ra ka , as having " arisen fr om a acq uire n great.e r comp rehension o f the li ke ly con­ vessel. ·' In Vedic literature and ritual trealises. lenls of the inscriplions_ befo re p roceeding to the (.5{1/llpttllw Briihmal! lI: XII 7, 2. 13. etc.) , saw is stage of linguistic decipherment . mentioned as some k in d of a sacrifi ciCll vesse l used ill 2) In my earli er pape rs (197U. 1972, 1973) I had ritllal. A late r co mmentul r (Sabaru swamin in proceeded on the assumplion thai rhe frequent termi­ Mimj'" jlslI Slllr" Bflashya, 1:3: 10) described :mUl as a na l signs of the Ind Ll s script probably re presented woode n vessel. round in shape CJ nd perforated with a gramm1:lt ical ·suflixes and that their values could be hundred ho les. He has also cit ed this term as all ascertai ned thr ugh the method of homophones. As I e xample of words of mlechlur o rigin without an have mentioned earl ier in this paper. the conCOr­ ctymo logy in Sanskril. T he re have heen nu merous da nce~ do not be~r (llLt this theQ ry. I am prescntl y fi nds of pe rfo r3ted pottery jars fro m the I-I arappan incl ined to the vicw that (he frequent terminal signs sites. It is no t unlikely t hat these perfo rated i'''s had were most probably employed in an ideographic some ritua l pu rpose. ense 10 indicate [he class of persons to whose names It thus appears tha t the JA R sign o f the Indus script 314 Ir(lvaflwm M ahadl!voll is a pidogram depicting a sacrificial vessel used in probably from kil, "yoke" (OED: 1193). On Ihe ba 'is priestly rit ual and probably employed as an ideogram of this evidence. one ca n interpret the "bearer" sign uffixed to names to denote the concepl of a pries!. In in the Indus cript when suffixetl to names as an later times, the jar symbolism continued [ 0 be ideogram with the approximate meaning of "officer" as 'oeiated with priestly and ruling classes and gave or "funclionary." rise to the myth of miraculous birth from a jar. I now A common tendency in [he lndian tradition is for beli eve that since Ihe JAR sign was probably used honorifics and titles to lose. th eir original signifi ca nce ideographicall y lo denote a priest , it is not necessa ry and become proper names . .If a similar development Ihal the words fo r "priesl" and "jar" were homo­ had taken place in re peet of Ihe "bearer" symbolism, phone ' in Ihe Harappan language. such names should be found among the princely or "rie tly fa milies in later times. This reasoning leads THE 'LANCE' S.IGN: 'I' One straighl to Ihe earliest and Ihe mosl famollsoflhc "bearer" cla n ' in ancient India. the Bhararas (liter­ T his is a terminal sign and it functions like the JAR a ll y "bearers" ), It is signifi callt that the Bharatas sign. Both signs function as terminals nOI only at th e were both priests and rul ers and occupied the Indus end of texts but also in medial positions. The pre­ regio n during the Vedic Period. The Andhras were ceding sequences in either case can be shown to be anOlher famoll dynasly wilh royal names derived complete Hwords" or "phrases" by th emselves. mO. l ITom the " bearer" motif. viz.. Satavahana and probably names and htles (Hunter 1934). There is Sii li va hana. In the Tamil country. the Cheras were therefore reason 10 beli eve th at the LAN E sign, like also known as Po[uiyar, literally " bearers" from POtU its functional twin . the JAR sign is an ideogram "to bear" (OED: 372Y). Important evidence to cor· su ffixed to name formations. It is easy to recognize roborate this n. socia tion comes from a series of hlte Ihe pictogram as an arrowhead or a lance. I suggesl medieval copper coins of the ru lers of Travancore thai Ihe LANCE ign was e mployed as an ideogram (inheriting the Iradition of Ihe Cher"s). which portray denoting the meaning of " warrior" when suffixed al the " bearer" motif which is pictorially prac[ically Ihe e nd of names a nd tilles. identical with the DEARER ideogram of the Indus script. (Cf. E lli ol 1886: no. 197.) THE 'BEAR R ' SI N: rn It is interes ting to observe the co nn ection be tween the JA Rand KEARFR signs in th e Jndu s scrlpt as we ll as The pictogram depicts a person carrying a yoke across in the later Indian Iradilion. The two signs occur in a his shoulders with loads suspended from either end. similar environment in the inscriptions indicating that The positional and functional characterislics of this they belong to Ihe same category. Another interest· sign are very simi lar to those of Ihe JAR sign. Thus the ing fl'ature is thai these two signs are often found BEARER sign also appears [0 be an ideogram occurring li gatured. In fact the compound JAR·nEARER sign as a suffixed element in name formati on. OCCurs mOre often than the BEARE.R sign. When One It appears possible to interpret the ideographic turns to later Indi cH1 tradition one finds that nallles mellning of Ihis sign with reference to the " bearer" or myths connecl.ed with the "jilr" and " bearer" motif occurring in later Indian tradition. The term motifs tend to OCCur in the same groups. The Kurus " bearer" is applied id io matically in Indian languages were generated in jars (Mahabh'/Ta/a, Adiparvull to a person who "shoulders" any responsibility or Giilldharip","orpalli) a nd were also called Ihe "bears" Ih e " burden" of any office. Thus the Sanskrit Bharat"s ("bearer "). The A ndhras had " jar" names word for husband bh(lI'I(, (literally one who sustains o r (Sala) ," well as "bearer" names (Sa t",,)han •. maintains) is from Ihe root bir r. "10 bear." There arc Salivahana). The name of the Cheras, A[an (prob­ sim ilar expressions derived from the rOOl vah, i'to ably to be derived from Siila), and Po!"i also show bear." as in kiirya-"iihaka " office bearer. " One may both the associalions. The Pallavas who claimed also refer to the Hyoke" wo rds like dlwrm11dlrara Or descent from a vessel (d. pilllraskJrlllitavrlifniim yll/{/lrl/dhnm (Iil erally "yoke bearer") used as honor­ occurring on the seal of Ihe Pallamkoyil Plates of itics or names. It is interest ing that in ancient Tamil Rajasimha; Subramanian 1~59) belonged to the tradition. ministers and senior officers of the king Bharadvaja gOl ra, another name with th e "bearer" were given the litle kavili (literally "yoke bearer") motif. Termilla/ldeograms ill the Indus Script 315

1 have publi shed earlier (Mahadevan 1972) what I THE 'MAN" SIGN: "!; consider to be the most interes1ing evidence connect­ ing the ideograms of the Indus script wi th later Indian T his i. il simple pictogram almosL uni ve rsally inter­ histo rica l na mes. A search for royal names based on preted liS representi ng a human figure. As a fi na l sign the "bearer" motif led me to the famous Andhra it forms. a frequent pair with th e JAR sign, but never dyn asty whose kings call ed themselve Satavahanas with Ihe LANCE sign. It is to be contrasted wilh tb.e or Salivah"nas. The suffix viJiwll" is connected with ideogram of a " homed person ," the latter obvio usly the "bearer" theme (vah,,"a: bearing. carrying). de picting a chieftain or a divi ne personage. Thus Ihe However since the second element vii/rolla never plain M.\!" sign can be in terpreted as depicting a

occurs se parately in these nam es j it struc,k me as servant or an attendant. .The pair JAR·MAN occurri ng probable that the preceding elements iira and silli in terminal positions can be interpreted as ideograms might also be derived from the Harappan substratum. for a lower order of priestly fUllctionaries. The BEARElol ideogram in th e Indus script o ften appears ligat ured or compounded wit h o ne of two T H E 'HARROW' SIGN: ~ other signs- th e JAR sign or the LAf\l CE sign. 1n an earlier paper (J972) I proposed reading these liga­ Kosambi (1 Y56, 1965) made the suggestion Ihal this tures from boltom to top on the ground that the JAR sign is a pi clogram representing the toothed harrow. and LANCE signs we re grammatical suffixes. I no Intermtl evidence for lhis idenliticarion is provided by longer hold this view and now believe Ihal Ihe liga­ the fallowing compound signs: tures may be read from top to bottom in Ihe normal *: Note the position of the harrow shown in manner. These compound ideograms ca n be consi­ front of the human fig ure and with the dered in th e light of th e intere ·ting parallelisms teeth facing the ground. shown in figure 29.1. The very close paralleli sms be­ tween the compound ideograms of the Indus script *,: H arrow in conj unction with a sheaf or and the co mpo und names in the later Indian historic\.ll bundle of grai n stalks. Iradition provide good confirmation of Ihe approach I have suggested. I inte rpret the sign as depicting a harrow and ideogra­ The two compound ideograms can be interpreted phically representing a farmer or tiller of Ihe land. on the basis of the ideographic values of their compo­ The characte ristic position of the sign is lerminal, nents. Thus Ihe ligature J An-BEARER (" priest plus frequently occurring in conjunction with the JAR. officer") may indicate an officer Or functionary with LA CE or BEARER signs. Such terminal clusters can be priestly duties. Si milarly Ihe li gature LAN CE·BEARER provi 'ionally in terpreted to indicate that the persons ("warrior plus officer") may stand for an officer or named in the inscriplions were perhaps farmers Dr fun ctionary with military duties. tenants , se rving under either priest·, warriors or

Sign Pictorial value Equivalents in Sanskrit Meani ng

JAR Sala A kind of sacri ficia l vessel

LANCE Satya Lance, spear

BEARER Vahano Bearing, carrying

JAR + BEARt::H Sata-vahana lit. , jar-bearing > Sat.avah ana n. pI. of Andhra dynasty

LANCE + BEARER L~aly{l-vah{lIla lit. , la nce-beari ng > Saliva hana n. pI. of Andhra dynasty

Fig . 29. 1. Indus ideograms in Indian hiSI ri~:'11 tradit ion . 316 lravarham Mahadevan

Sign Pictorial value Ideographic meaning

JA.R (sacrificial vessel) Pries!

LANCE Warrior

BEAR~ R Officer or functionary

JAR ... BEARER Officer or functionary with priestly duties

LANCE + BEARER Officer or functionary with military duties

MAN Servant, attendant or lower functionary

I-fARROW Farmer, tiller, tenant.

Fig. 29.2. Terminal Kieograms or Ihe Indus script. officen; (as the case may be) or, alternatively, them­ terminal signs in the Indus script are probably ideo­ selves belonging to these categories. It is interesting grams indicating the occupations and social status of to recall here the ancient classification of the Ve!!alar the persons to whose names these signs arc suffixed. (the predominant agricultural population among tbe The tentative interpretations of these ideograms are Tamils) into those who earned their livelihood by summarized in figure 29.2. It is not ye t clear whether ploughing the land themselves or by having the land these ideograms were actually pronounced as part of ploughed by others (Naccinarkkiniyar on Tolkap· names and titles, as in later Indian caste names. or piyam, PO"'i , 34). merely served as mute determinatives. as in the Egyp· To urn up, it appears likely that the frequen t tian script.

BffiLIOGRAPHY

Burrow, T. and M.B. Emeneau, 1961 Ethnography. Translated by Arlene R.K. Zide Dravidian Etymological Dictionary. Oxford: The and Kamil V. Zvelehil as The Soviet Decipher­ University Press. ment of Ihe /tldus Valley Script. 1976. The Hague: Elliot, W., 1886 Mouton. Coins of Southern India. London: Macmillan . Knorozov, Yu.V. etal., 1968 Forrer, Emil, 1932 Proto-Indica: Brief report On tite Invesligation of The Hittite Idiographic Writing. Chicago: Univer­ Proto· India" Texts. Moscow. sity .nf Chicago Press. Kosambi, 0.0 .. 1956 Hunler, G.R., 1934 All Introduction 10 Ihe Study of Indian Nis/ory. The Script of Harappa and Mohenjodaro and its Bombay: Popular Book Depot. Coltnection With Oliter Scripts. London: Kegan Kosambi, D.O., 1965 Paul. Tile Culture and Civililution of Ancient India in Knorozov, Yu . V. el aI. , 1965 Historical O"lline. London: Routledge and Preliminary Report on the Invesligatwn of the Kegan Paul. Proto-Indian Texts. Moscow: Soviet Institute of Lal . B.B. , 1974 Scientifi c and Technical Information, Institute of Some Aspects of the Archaeological "Evidence Terminu/ldeograms in th e In dus Script 317

Relating to the Ind us Script. Pllra/Guava 7: 20-24 . A nt hropological and Ethnological Sciences, De­ Lal, B.B., in press cember 197M . New Delhi.

On the Most Frequently Used Sign in the fndus Mahadevan , Irav3 tham 1 in press b crip!. Paper read at the Xth Imernati on .. 1 Con­ Indus Script in the Indian Historica l Tradition . gress of Anthropologica l Ethn ological Sciences, Paper read at the Seminar o n Astronomical Data December 1978, New Delhi . fro m History. 1979. Madras. MClhadevan, l ravat h::lrn , 197U Mahadevan, I. and K . Visvanathan, 1973 Dravidian Parallels in Proto-Indian Scri p!. JOll r­ Computer Concordance of Proto-Indian Signs. In "lIl of Tamil SHldies 2 (I): 157·276 . R"diocarbOlI OIld Indian Archaeology. D.P. Ag­ Mahadevan, lravatham , 1972 rawal and A. Ghosh, eds. Pp. 291-304. Bombay: Study of the Indus Script Through Bi-li nguat Tata Institute of Fundamental Research. l'"n,lIels. Proceedings of tire Second All-India Parpola , A . el 01.• 1%9 Conference of Drallidian LinguisTs. Tirupati: Sri Deciphermelll of the Proto· Indian Inscriptions of Venk£ll eswarn Uni versity. Reprinted in Ancien! the Indus Civilization: A firsl annOllllcement. Ciliesoflhe Indus. G.L. Possehl. ed. Pr. 261-67. Copenhagen: Scandinavinn Institute of Asian D c l ~ i: Vi kas. Studies. Mah adevan.lrava tham,1973 Parpoln. A ., el al.. 1973 Method of Parall el isms in the jnterpretation of Materials fur Ihe Sludy of Ihe Indlls Serif}l: I. A th e Proto- Indian Script. Proceedings of Ihe Illrd Concordllnce to the In dus Inscriptions. Helsinki : International Conference-Seminar 0'-' Tamil Helsinki University. SllI riies. Paris: Institut Francai ' d·jndologie. Parpola. A . era! .. 1979 Ma hadevan, lravat ham. 1977 Corpus of TeXIS in Ihe IlItillS Scrip!. Helsinki: The I"dus Seripl: Texis. Concordance and Tables. Helsinki University. Memo irs of the ArchaeologiC3 1 Survey of India Subramanian. T. N., 1959 77. Delhi : Government of India. Pa!!afJ.k ovil Jaina Copper Plate Grant of the Early Mahudevan, lravatham. in press l:I Pallava Pe riod. Trallsactions of til e Arc/weologi­ Recent Advances in the Study of the Indus Script. cal Society of SOUlh Illdia: 41. Paper read at the Xth Intern a tional Congress of