DOCSLIB.ORG

An Introduction to Indus Writing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Introduction to Indus Writing University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Graduate Studies Legacy Theses 1998 An introduction to indus writing Wells, Bryan Wells, B. (1998). An introduction to indus writing (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/23641 http://hdl.handle.net/1880/25900 master thesis University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca THE UMNERSITY OF CALGARY An Introduction To Indus Writing by Bryan Wells A THESIS SUBMIïTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY CALGARY, ALBERTA JMARY, 1998 O Bryan Weiis 1998 National library ûibbthèque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie SeMces senrices bibliographiques 395 Wehgton Street 395, rue Wellington -ON K1AW ôUaw8 ON KtA ON4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence dowing the exclusive permettant à la National Liirary of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, 10- distriiute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis m microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous papa or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/nlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownersbip of the L'auteur conseme la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts ftom it Ni la thèse ni des edtssubstantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne dofvent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son D~sS~OIL* autorisation. NAM.D UB.SARRA AMA CO.D~KE,.E.NEAl uM.ME& XE,& 'Writing ir the niothu of speakers, the father of scholard* G.R. Driver (1 976: 1) Abstrac t This thesis uses the conjunctive approach to anaiyze inscriptions of the Indus Valley Civilization (1600-3000 BC), presented in five chapten: Chapter 1 The Archaeology of the Indus Civilization; Chapter 2 Inscribed Indus Artifacts; Chapter 3 Indus Sign List; Chapter 4 Analyzing Indus inscriptions; and Chapter 5 Reading Indus Signs. The purpose of interrelating these lines of evidence is to resolve basic issues concerning the cultural and linguistic identity of the Indus (Harappan) people. The intemal workings of Indus inscriptions are examined. 1conclude that the Language of the Indus inscriptions has many characteristics of Proto-Dravidian as reconstructed. The subject matter of the majority of texts is economic, and the script is logo-syilabic. Major ciifferences in sign distribitions can be used to identiQ syntactic elements in Indus texts. The *kWan reading in Chapter 5 is used to relate case endings in PDr with specific signs. Acknowledgments The process of creating the Indus sign list used in this thesis took many hours of collecting, editing, entering, checking, and double checking ail data base entries. The helpful suggestions and long suffering patience of Margaret Thornason of Calgary made the Indus sign list data base possible. Thank you Dr. Radhakrishnan, University of Calgary, Deparmient of Archaeology for your advice on Chapter 5. Cost of thesis production and data input were offset by fianciai contributions by Neale E. Smith of Douglas, Arizona and by Early Sites Research Society, Inc. (James P Whittall Jr, Director). Thank you Susan Bonten for the loan of your cornputer which was used in al1 aspects of thesis research and production. To my mother Hazel who always clipped the archaeology stories from the newspapers and magazines for me, and who helped me through the tough times, thank you. Special thanks to Vladimir and Margaret Markotic for their generous gift of Indus books and articles. It was a pleasure and an honor to snidy with Dr. David H. Kelley, Professor emeritus, University of Calgary, Sak Itzat. Thank you for your help and guidance. Dedication for Vladimir Markotic who got me started and David Kelley who wouldn't let me quit TABLE OF CONTENTS Approvai Page .................................................................................................................... ...ii Absmct.................... .....o......................................C...t....................................................... UI Acknowledgments. .... ...... ........... ........................... iv Dedication........................................................................................................................... v Table of Contents ...... .............. ..C....C,...........o..........o.............................. ................... ...vi List of Tables.............,L.......,,..,,...................C.................o.C..~........................................... ......... VU List of Figures ............ .................. ................................................................................... ix CHAPTER 1: INDUS (3vLIZAnON............................................................................ 1 Introduction......... .........................*.............................................................. 1 The Archaeology of the Indus Vaiiey ...................... ... ....................... 2 CHAPTER 2: INSCRIBED INDUS ARTIFACTS .......... .. .......................................... 20 Introduction........ .................... ................................................................ 20 Inscribed Artifact Types........................................................................... 22 Seais.......................................................................................................... 25 Type A ...................... ......... ................................................................. 26 Field Objects................... .. ................................................. 27 Cult Objects .......................... ................................................ 28 Type B ...................... .................................................................. 29 Type C............................ ...........*.....*.....*............................................. 29 Type D ..................... .. ................*...*...*..............................................30 Type E .................................................................................................31 Type F................... .. ...................*........*..**..................................... 31 Tablets .................... .. ..*...*...*....*..............*...*........*....*.*.............................32 Type G a-b .......................... ........................................................... 32 Type G c-e ...................... ... ........................................................... 33 Type J............................ ....~............. ....................................... 33 MisceUaneous Obiec. ts .............................................................................. 33 Type K ..................................................... .......................... 33 Ceramic Vessels ...................... .........,.. 33 Type L............................................................................................ 35 Type M ............................................................................................... 35 Type N/O ............................................................................................ 35 CHAPTER 3: INDUS SIGN LIST.............................. .......... 42 Approaches To The Indus Script ................ .......................................... 43 Stroke Signs.............................................................................................. 47 The Sign List Data Base ................ .... ................................................ 48 Expanding Parpola's Critena............ .. ...*............................................ 49 Mahadevan's Sign 15................. ................................... .................... 51 AppIying the Expanded Sign Critena...................................................... 52 Collateral Rdts............................................................ 54 Changes In OnentationTo Save Space: Sign414.................................. 54 The Range Of AUographic Variation In Sign 4....................................... 55 Compound Signs ...................................................................................... 56 Internai Hatching... ................................................................................... 57 Concl~on 59 CHAPTER 4: ANALYZING INDUS INSCRIPITONS.... ............................................. '78 The History Of 'IZie Shuchiral Analysis of The lndus Script...-.....-..,- 85 . The Structure of The Indus. .Inscriptions ................................................ 91 ExamhiqParald Ipscnph~~l~~,,,~.,.-.....~.~-~ ..--..... 91 Column Analysis. .............................................................................. 91 Field Shiftuig ........ ,, .-..-. ., .... 94 Field Contents ........................................................................................ % EieldL-U-U..--I------------U1.I- ..-. -.... YI ..-.......-.. 97 . Field II.......... .........t......+....eo.....
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 5. the Harappan Script Controversy
    5. The Harappan script controversy (Subchapters 5.1-10 are the text of the paper “The Vedic Harappans in writing: Remarks in expectation of a decipherment of the Indus script”, written in late 1999, if I remember correctly. Instead of a postscript, subchapters 5.11-12 summarize a later development in 2003-2004, which throws an entirely different light on the meaning of the Indus script. At the time of editing this collection, I am agnostic on this question.) 5.1. Introduction In the Harappan cities some 4200 seals, many of them duplicates, have been found which carry short inscriptions in an otherwise unknown script. There is not the slightest doubt that this harvest of Harappan writings is but the tip of an iceberg, in this sense that the Harappan culture must have produced much more copious writings, but that most of them disappeared because the writing materials were not resistant to the ravages of time, particularly in the Indian climate. This fatality can still be seen today, when the libraries of many impoverished maharajas' castles are full of manuscripts which are decaying under our very eyes, turning large chunks of India's national memory and heritage into dust. Even of the oldest and most popular texts, the extant manuscripts are seldom older than a few centuries, copies made as the only guarantee to save the texts from the ravages of time which were destroying the earlier copies. It is fair to assume that a text corpus proportionate in size to the enormous extent of the Harappan cultural space, has gone the same way into oblivion.
    [Show full text]
  • ICONS and SIGNS from the ANCIENT HARAPPA Amelia Sparavigna ∗ Dipartimento Di Fisica, Politecnico Di Torino C.So Duca Degli Abruzzi 24, Torino, Italy
    ICONS AND SIGNS FROM THE ANCIENT HARAPPA Amelia Sparavigna ∗ Dipartimento di Fisica, Politecnico di Torino C.so Duca degli Abruzzi 24, Torino, Italy Abstract Written words probably developed independently at least in three places: Egypt, Mesopotamia and Harappa. In these densely populated areas, signs, icons and symbols were eventually used to create a writing system. It is interesting to see how sometimes remote populations are using the same icons and symbols. Here, we discuss examples and some results obtained by researchers investigating the signs of Harappan civilization. 1. Introduction The debate about where and when the written words were originated is still open. Probably, writing systems developed independently in at least three places, Egypt, Mesopotamia and Harappa. In places where an agricultural civilization flourished, the passage from the use of symbols to a true writing system was early accomplished. It means that, at certain period in some densely populated area, signs and symbols were eventually used to create a writing system, the more complex society requiring an increase in recording and communication media. Signs, symbols and icons were always used by human beings, when they started carving wood or cutting stones and painting caves. We find signs on drums, textiles and pottery, and on the body itself, with tattooing. To figure what symbols used the human population when it was mainly composed by small groups of hunter-gatherers, we could analyse the signs of Native Americans. Our intuition is able to understand many of these old signs, because they immediately represent the shapes of objects and animals. It is then quite natural that signs and icons, born among people in a certain region, turn out to be used by other remote populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction Roger D
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-56256-0 — The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World's Ancient Languages Edited by Roger D. Woodard Excerpt More Information chapter 1 Introduction roger d. woodard 1.1 Preliminary remarks What makes a language ancient? The term conjures up images, often romantic, of archeol- ogists feverishly copying hieroglyphs by torchlight in a freshly discovered burial chamber; of philologists dangling over a precipice in some remote corner of the earth, taking impres- sions of an inscription carved in a cliff-face; of a solitary scholar working far into the night, puzzling out some ancient secret, long forgotten by humankind, from a brittle-leafed manuscript or patina-encrusted tablet. The allure is undeniable, and the literary and film worlds have made full use of it. An ancient language is indeed a thing of wonder – but so is every other language, all remarkable systems of conveying thoughts and ideas across time and space. And ancient languages, as far back as the very earliest attested, operate just like those to which the linguist has more immediate access, all with the same familiar elements – phonological, morphological, syntactic – and no perceptible vestiges of Neanderthal oddities. If there was a time when human language was characterized by features and strategies fundamentally unlike those we presently know, it was a time prior to the development of any attested or reconstructed language of antiquity. Perhaps, then, what makes an ancient language different is our awareness that it has outlived those for whom it was an intimate element of the psyche, not so unlike those rays of light now reaching our eyes that were emitted by their long-extinguished source when dinosaurs still roamed across the earth (or earlier) – both phantasms of energy flying to our senses from distant sources, long gone out.
    [Show full text]
  • First Capitals of Armenia and Georgia: Armawir and Armazi (Problems of Early Ethnic Associations)
    First Capitals of Armenia and Georgia: Armawir and Armazi (Problems of Early Ethnic Associations) Armen Petrosyan Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Yerevan The foundation legends of the first capitals of Armenia and Georgia – Armawir and Armazi – have several common features. A specific cult of the moon god is attested in both cities in the triadic temples along with the supreme thunder god and the sun god. The names of Armawir and Armazi may be associated with the Anatolian Arma- ‘moon (god).’ The Armenian ethnonym (exonym) Armen may also be derived from the same stem. The sacred character of cultic localities is extremely enduring. The cults were changed, but the localities kept their sacred character for millennia. At the transition to a new religious system the new cults were often simply imposed on the old ones (e.g., the old temple was renamed after a new deity, or the new temple was built on the site or near the ruins of the old one). The new deities inherited the characteristics of the old ones, or, one may say, the old cults were simply renamed, which could have been accompanied by some changes of the cult practices. Evidently, in the new system more or less comparable images were chosen to replace the old ones: similarity of functions, rituals, names, concurrence of days of cult, etc (Petrosyan 2006: 4 f.; Petrosyan 2007a: 175).1 On the other hand, in the course of religious changes, old gods often descend to the lower level of epic heroes. Thus, the heroes of the Armenian ethnogonic legends and the epic “Daredevils of Sasun” are derived from ancient local gods: e.g., Sanasar, who obtains the 1For numerous examples of preservation of pre-Urartian and Urartian holy places in medieval Armenia, see, e.g., Hmayakyan and Sanamyan 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • Relation Between Harappan and Brahmi Scripts
    Relation Between Harappan And Brahmi Scripts Subhajit Ganguly Email: [email protected] Copyright © Subhajit Ganguly, 2012 Abstract: Around 45 odd signs out of the total number of Harappan signs found make up almost 100 percent of the inscriptions, in some form or other, as said earlier. Out of these 45 signs, around 40 are readily distinguishable. These form an almost exclusive and unique set. The primary signs are seen to have many variants, as in Brahmi. Many of these provide us with quite a vivid picture of their evolution, depending upon the factors of time, place and usefulness. Even minor adjustments in such signs, depending upon these factors, are noteworthy. Many of the signs in this list are the same as or are very similar to the corresponding Brahmi signs. These are similarities that simply cannot arise from mere chance. It is also to be noted that the most frequently used signs in the Brahmi look so similar to the most frequent Harappan symbols. The Harappan script transformed naturally into the Brahmi, depending upon the factors channelizing evolution of scripts. Brahmi Signs: hough a few variants of the Brahmi alphabet system have been known to exist, with the evolution of Brahmi characters, the core signs are seen to be quite consistent over T time. The syntax of their usage has also been found to be roughly consistent throughout this evolution process. Lists of Brahmi numerals, vowels and consonants are provided here in fig. 2and fig. 3 , respectively: 1 Fig. 2 : Brahmi numerals from 1-9. 2 Fig. 3 : Brahmi vowels and consonants.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Civilizations Singled out for National Awards by a National Committee Headed by George Gallup
    The Evolution of Civilizations n this perceptive look at the factors behind the rise and fall of I civilizations, Professor Quigley seeks to establish the analytical tools necessary for understanding history. He examines the applica- tion of scientific method to the social sciences, then establishes his historical hypotheses. He poses a division of culture into six levels, from the more abstract to the more concrete—intellectual, religious, social, political, economic, and military—and he identifies seven stages of historical change for all civilizations: mixture, gestation, expansion, conflict, universal empire, decay, and invasion. Quigley tests these hypotheses by a detailed analysis of five major civilizations: the Mesopotamian, the Canaanite, the Minoan, the classical, and the Western. "He has reached sounder ground than has Arnold J. Toynbee" —Christian Science Monitor. "Studies of this nature, rare in American historiography, should be welcomed. Quigley's juxtaposition of facts in a novel order is often provocative, and his work yields a harvest of insights"—American Historical Review. "Extremely illuminating" —Kirkus Reviews. "This is an amazing book. Quigley avoids the lingo of expertise; indeed, the whole performance is sane, impres- sively analytical, and well balanced"—Library Journal. CARROLL QUIGLEY taught the history of civilization at the Georgetown School of Foreign Service, and was the author of Trag- edy and Hope: The World in Our Time. Contents Diagrams, Tables, and Maps .................................................... 11 Foreword, by Harry J. Hogan ................................................... 13 Preface to the First Edition ....................................................... 23 1. Scientific Method and the Social Sciences.......................... 31 2. Man and Culture.................................................................. 49 3. Groups, Societies, and Civilizations.................................... 67 4. Historical Analysis .............................................................. 85 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Origin and Development of the Indus Script: Insights from Harappa and Other Sites, In: Lashari, K
    Kenoyer, J.M., 2020. The Origin and Development of the Indus Script: Insights from Harappa and other Sites, in: Lashari, K. (Ed.), Studies on Indus Script, National Fund for Mohenjodaro, Karachi, pp. 217-236. Origin and Development of the Indus Script: Insights from Harappa and other sites Jonathan Mark Kenoyer Origin and Development of the Indus Script: Insights from Harappa and other sites Introduction The origin of the Indus script has been a source of considerable discussion ever since the discovery and excavation of the Indus cities of Mohenjo-daro and Harappa in the 1920s to 1930s (Marshall 1931; Vats 1940). When the Indus civilization was discovered the only other early civilizations known to have writing in the Old World were the ancient Sumerians along the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers in southern Mesopotamia (Nissen 1993), the ancient Egyptians along the Nile (Baines 2004) and the ancient Chinese along the Huang He (Yellow) River in north central China (Haicheng 2015). The oracle bone inscriptions at the site of Yinxu in Anyang were being discovered around the same time that Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa were being excavated (Bagley 1999, 127). Although at first some scholars thought that there might be some influence from Mesopotamian writing systems, in the first major report on the excavations at Mohenjo Daro in 1931, Gadd clearly states that there was no connection between the Indus script and the writing of Sumer or for that matter Egypt (Gadd 1931, 411). Surveys and test excavations in Baluchistan (Stein 1929; Hargreaves and Sewell 1929 (reprint 1981); Stein 1931) and Sindh (Majumdar 1934; Stein 1942) had recovered pottery that appeared to be older than that found at Mohenjo Daro, but little attention was paid to the presence of potter’s marks or graffiti on these different types of pottery.
    [Show full text]
  • Languages of Harappa
    •§ Michael Witzel Feb. 17, 2000 135 k The Languages of Harappa § 1. The riddle of the Indus script and language Each year, or as it seems, by now every other month, we see a new decipherment of the Indus script. Beyond G. Possehl's fifty-odd examples (Possehl 1996), there must be some dozens more, by now frequently found on the internet. However, as is well known, neither is the script itself well understood nor do we know on which language it is based and for which languages it has been used. In this paper, I am not going to add myself to the long list of failures of decipherment of the script. Instead, I think we should first prepare the ground for such undertaking by investigating the peculiarities of the script itself, a task that has not been carried systematically enough (Wells 1998). Secondly, we should take a much closer look at the various sources which may indicate which languages were spoken in the core areas of the Indus civilization, in the Greater Panjab and in Sindh-Baluchistan. During the past few decades, the language underlying the Indus script has almost universally been taken as Proto-Dravidian (leaving aside such unlikely explanations as Sanskrit, Sumerian, etc., see Possehl 1996). This means a form of reconstructed, early Dravidian that precedes --by some two thousand years or more-- that of the Sangam (Cakam) texts which were composed in archaic Tamil around the beginning of our era. The tacit presupposition has been that the by and large South Indian Dravidian languages preceded the various dialects of Old Indo-Aryan (OIA) in the Panjab and Sindh.
    [Show full text]
  • Harappan Civilization
    ~{ ,"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.
    [Show full text]
  • Walking with the Unicorn Social Organization and Material Culture in Ancient South Asia
    Walking with the Unicorn Social Organization and Material Culture in Ancient South Asia Jonathan Mark KenoyerAccess Felicitation Volume Open Edited by Dennys Frenez, Gregg M. Jamison, Randall W. Law, Massimo Vidale and Richard H. Meadow Archaeopress Archaeopress Archaeology © Archaeopress and the authors, 2017. Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Summertown Pavilion 18-24 Middle Way Summertown Oxford OX2 7LG www.archaeopress.com ISBN 978 1 78491 917 7 ISBN 978 1 78491 918 4 (e-Pdf) © ISMEO - Associazione Internazionale di Studi sul Mediterraneo e l'Oriente, Archaeopress and the authors 2018 Front cover: SEM microphotograph of Indus unicorn seal H95-2491 from Harappa (photograph by J. Mark Kenoyer © Harappa Archaeological Research Project). Access Back cover, background: Pot from the Cemetery H Culture levels of Harappa with a hoard of beads and decorative objects (photograph by Toshihiko Kakima © Prof. Hideo Kondo and NHK promotions). Back cover, box: Jonathan Mark Kenoyer excavating a unicorn seal found at Harappa (© Harappa Archaeological Research Project). Open ISMEO - Associazione Internazionale di Studi sul Mediterraneo e l'Oriente Corso Vittorio Emanuele II, 244 Palazzo Baleani Archaeopress Roma, RM 00186 www.ismeo.eu Serie Orientale Roma, 15 This volume was published with the financial assistance of a grant from the Progetto MIUR 'Studi e ricerche sulle culture dell’Asia e dell’Africa: tradizione e continuità, rivitalizzazione e divulgazione' All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. Printed in England by The Holywell Press, Oxford This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com © Archaeopress and the authors, 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancestral Dravidian Languages in Indus Civilization
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00868-w OPEN Ancestral Dravidian languages in Indus Civilization: ultraconserved Dravidian tooth-word reveals deep linguistic ancestry and supports genetics ✉ Bahata Ansumali Mukhopadhyay 1 Ever since the discovery of Indus valley civilization, scholars have debated the linguistic identities of its people. This study analyzes numerous archaeological, linguistic, archae- 1234567890():,; ogenetic and historical evidences to claim that the words used for elephant (like, ‘pīri’, ‘pīru’) in Bronze Age Mesopotamia, the elephant-word used in the Hurrian part of an Amarna letter of ca. 1400 BC, and the ivory-word (‘pîruš’) recorded in certain sixth century BC Old Persian documents, were all originally borrowed from ‘pīlu’, a Proto-Dravidian elephant-word, which was prevalent in the Indus valley civilization, and was etymologically related to the Proto- Dravidian tooth-word ‘*pal’ and its alternate forms (‘*pīl’/‘*piḷ’/‘*pel’). This paper argues that there is sufficient morphophonemic evidence of an ancient Dravidian ‘*piḷ’/‘*pīl’-based root, which meant ‘splitting/crushing’, and was semantically related to the meanings ‘tooth/tusk’. This paper further observes that ‘pīlu’ is among the most ancient and common phytonyms of the toothbrush tree Salvadora persica, which is a characteristic flora of Indus valley, and whose roots and twigs have been widely used as toothbrush in IVC regions since antiquity. This study claims that this phytonym ‘pīlu’ had also originated from the same Proto-Dravidian tooth-word, and argues that since IVC people had named their toothbrush trees and tuskers (elephants) using a Proto-Dravidian tooth-word, and since these names were widely used across IVC regions, a significant population of Indus valley civilization must have used that Proto-Dravidian tooth-word in their daily communication.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Early Writing in India
    The Evolution of Early Writing in India Subhash Kak Indian Journal of History of Science, vol. 28, 1994, pp. 375-388 I The Indus-Sarasvat¯ı cultural tradition represents the be- ginnings of the Indian civilization. This tradition has been traced back to about 7000 B.C. in remains that have been uncovered in Mehrgarh and other sites.1 Its first urban phase was during the Harappan period of 2600-1900 B.C. The writ- ing used in this phase has hitherto been called the Indus writing, but it appears that it should be properly named the Sarasvat¯ıwriting2 because most of the settlements in this period were along the Sarasvat¯ı river and because the Indian tradition associates Sarasvat¯ı with learning and literacy in its earliest phase. Goddesses have symbolized later scripts as well such as Br¯ahm¯ıandS¯´arad¯a. It is now believed that the capture of Sutudr¯´ ı (Satluj) and Yamun¯a, the two main tributaries of the Sarasvat¯ıriver,by Indus and Gang¯ _ a around 1900 B.C. led to the desiccation of Sarasvat¯ı and collapse of the Harappan urban phase. The focus of the civilization started moving east and south. The Indus-Sarasvat¯ı tradition continued in a state of decline until a second urbanization began in the Gang¯ _ a-Yamun¯a valley around 900 B.C. The earliest surviving records of this culture are in Br¯ahm¯ı script. This second urbanization is generally seen at the end of the Painted Gray Ware (PGW) phase and with the use of the Northern Black Polished Ware (NBP) pottery.3 Late Harappan was partially contemporary with the 1 PGW phase so that we see a continuous series of cultural developments linking the two early urbanizations of India.
    [Show full text]