CHAPTER - IV

AN ASSESSMENT
OF THE METHODOLOGY
FOLLOWED BY S. R. RAO
 AN ASSESSMENT OF THE METHODOLOGY FOLLOWED BY S. R. RAO

j
INTRODUCTION j
The problem of deciphering the Indus Script has engaged j
the concerted efforts of scholars for the past fift,y or more

years. One of the difficulties that has continually impeded

j
the decipherment of the Indus Script 15 the determination of
j
t.he exact number of its symbols while most scholars have

considered Indus Script as static all through. For the fir~t j

time it is S.R.Rao(l} who pointed out that the Indus Script

passed through several stages of developmentr the number of

j
signs being much redueed in the latest phases, as exemplified j
particularly by late seals from Mohenjo-daro( 2 ), Harappa( 3 )

Lot.hal-B
(4)
, Rangpur ( 5 ) ~ Dholavira ( 6 a 'b l, Jajjhar{ 6 c) j
.tdamgi rpur <6 d) . h a h pur 16 el , Dalma
Ra kh 1s · b a d 171 , Surkotada(S)
j
and Rojdi( 9 ) (Fig. 11 -14). The excavations at Lothal from
1955 to 1962 have revealed that the Indus Civilization did j
not die a sudden death in 1900 B.c., but survived for -nearly

300 years more in Gujarat than in the Indus Valle.y. The

j
Harappans at Lothal continued to use the simplified writing, J

so much so that it is now possible to trace the evolution of

the Indus Script from a sophisticated picture-cum-cursive J

system of the early days (2500-1900 B.C) to the pure.ly J

2
cursive system in the Late phase (1900-1600 B.C.>( ) (Fig.

15-16). j
j
95
j
 Inscriptions of ( Lote Levels )
Haroppa

^ CXI ^ II V or

N^c^iiu
* ^ ® i M/4 II
T mil CpU
6 T m ^ II u
I ^ ^^
12)
Mohtnjo-doro

2 lYim
^i\/00
» n ^ i i oc
6 ffl H " ' lA' ©
^ IF rf> 0
« -^If OOlF^ 111^
FIG. II

96
 Inscriptions of Late levels
Lothal
No. Inscription
1
Y ch
2
* ^

3
: : ^ ^ \ / ^

4 P iY
5
C ^ "•
6 y^/J^
7
V t>c
« O'A
Jajjhor

E^ i>c ' \ / ^ 0') u

Rangpur II c -IH

Rojdi

RG. 12

97
 Inscription o f Late levels
Dholavira Late levels

///// lip " #

# nil "0
III
Hakhi - Shohpur (Tajjhar)

Kolibangon

ill!
I I I I
4>

FIG.13

98
Inscription of Late levels
Chonhudoro

' \ f Y I'l

6 Ij/^ll^lll

Yii! e

'01/;;; ' 7 H
Ropar

I <ij; O i i i i l O M /

Alomgirpur

M ^ H b Mil.

Probhaspotan

t
in
F I G . 14

99
 Inscriptions with picturts
No. Inscription Sit* Plata No Sourc«

1
U $^^(t'^ H" ^""X^' 16 Vatt

2
1/ ^ ) y © •"> '^•" (6( MorthoU

3 \ j ^ >i^ " A MO CVIII 181 MartlioU

4
t / >X v^ ^ "° <='" 13 MarskQll

S 4((j)[i $ " ^ "" ^XXXV'H 97 Vott

6 69 Martholl
^ < ^ ^ "^ =^

7 S S "^ HP LXXXIX 120 Vatt

8 A H ( ^ HP >^CI 284 Vatt

9
=^ Jl^ ij. 83 Morthoti

to
e>;jj>|7 ^^
' ^^
' 36 Mankali

II
^IVTA^ ^^ ^^*" 182 Marthali

12 1 (^ZiMA MO CVIII 143 Martkoil

13 163 MonlKiU

14 U I ^ ^ MD CXIU 417 MortlMii

15 420 Marthoil

Fl G. 15

100
 Inscriptions with cursive signs only
N« Site Plate No Sourc*
1
2
MD HP LXXXIX 155 Vols
HP' LXXXVI 91 Vats

3
Y?
t^ HP LXXXIX 149 Vans
4 HP LXXXIX 129 Vati
^/^i .
5
uri^ HP XCIV 646 Vats

6
7
i &e HP
MD
XCV
CIX
422
186
Vols
Marshall
^\fA<^
8
r^-i^ MD cyiii 409 MorsNU

9 ivo HP XCV 379 Vats

10 1 le® MD CIX 204 MarthoU

II
(^A"<3^ MO evil 127 Marshall

12 ^ ^ ' ^ MO CXiii 455 Marsholl

13
t^M4 MO CVIIl 176 Marshall

14
1^0 HP XCV 422 Vals

15
§=i:fYi HP LXXXIX 161 Vats

16
tf^^ HP LXXXIX 149 Vots

17
voc^v^ HP LXXXIX 113 Vots

19
t^"0 Lolhal cxxv 12 S. R.Rao

19 Lo4hQl cxxv 2 t Jt.Roo

;t::<s)
FIG. 16

101
 (2)
This cursive writing noticeable in Late Mohenjo-daro

and Harappa levels also continued to be in use at

Surkotada , Dholavira ' , Rangpur (Gujarat) upto 1500

B.C. and Daimabad (7 ) (Maharastra) and even later at Bet

,-(10)
Dwarka

It is Dr.S.R.Rao who carried out an extensive study on

the decipherment of Indus Script. An exclusive evaluation has

been made to assess his contribution in regard to decoding of

the Indus Script.

S.R.Rao has demonstrated convincingly that the

decipherment of an unknown script such as the Indus Valley

script written in an unknown language is not possible unless

the stage of development of the writing itself is determined.

This is possible only when the number of basic signs in the

script is determined by a careful analysis of the compound

signs. He has also pointed out that an a. priori assumption of

language misleads the dicipherer. Rao has further highlighted

the drawback of assuming pseudo-pictures as words in the

assumed language. The necessity of analysing them is stressed

by him for finding basic signs. It is the number of basic

signs which determines whether the script is pictographic,

logographic or phonetic.

Pictographic and Ideographic scripts have thousands of

signs, while logographs like the Egyptian, Sumerian and

Hittite scripts have signs ranging from 700 to 450. Phonetic

scripts have 100-150 signs, (e.g. Sumerian) or even less,

(e.g. Hittite syllabic writing). All signs in the Indus

102
Script cannot be considered as basic signs for many have

additional strokes or diacritics attached to them and

hundreds of signs are compound signs. In these circumstances

it was felt necessary to carry out the structural analysis of

compound signs, so as to arrive at the correct number of

basic signs in the Indus Script.

An important point brought out by S.R. Rao is that the

Indus, Brahmi and DevnSgari Scripts have certain common

features such as the doubling of signs, (e.g. p + p = pp)

attaching strokes (diacritics) to basic signs and joining of

two or more signs to form conjunct consonants (Samyukta

Aksharas) (e.g. pta, tra, dra, pc etc.). The diacritics were

used as vocalic indicators in Brahmi (k + a^ = ka_, k + a_e =

kae etc.). These two techniques originated in Indus writing.

The Indus compound signs, formed by joining two or more

basic signs look like pictures and are given word value by
(11) (12)
Soviet , Finnish and other scholars. In fact, S.R. Rao

assumed that the majority of the signs in the inscriptions

are modifications of the basic signs made by adding short

strokes (Fig. 17) and by doubling the same sign or

compounding two or more signs with or without the appendage

of these strokes (Fig. 18). These processes of modification

of the basic signs are essentially like those found in Asokan

Br'ahmi (Fig. 19) and Kharoshthi inscriptions and inherited by

(13)
all the later derivative Indie writing systems
By separating the simple signs from those with strokes

attached (Fig. 20) and by a careful analysis of pseudo

103
pictures such as 'archer', 'porter* etc. S.R. Rao concluded

that the number of basic signs in Indus Script is not 400 as

presumed by most other scholars but only 62 in Early Harappan

Script and 24 in Late Harappan (Fig. 21). He has listed 40

cursive signs and 12 pictograms in Early Harappan Script

(2500 - 1900 B.C) and 22 cursive in Late Harappan Script

which had dropped pictures and some alternate cursive signs

also. With such a small number of basic signs the script

cannot be pictographic, ideographic or logographic but it has

to be classified as phonetic, partly syllabic and partly

alphabetic (14) . There appear to be a few determinatives in

addition to 40 cursive signs and 12 pictograms in the Early

Harappan writing. The linear signs stand for cardinal

numbers.

In assigning phonetic values to the twenty basic signs

of the Late Harappan Script, S.R. Rao is guided by the more

or less contemporary consonantal Semitic Script of the

Lachish and Ahiram inscriptions (1600 - 1300 B.C.), 17 of

whose signs are shown to bear remarkably close resemblance to

those of Late Harappan.

In comparing similar signs of two distinct scripts one

must be careful to make sure that they are contemporary or

almost contemporary as in the case of Late Harappan and

Semitic scripts. Some signs in any two ancient or even modern

scripts are likely to bear resemblance but this should not

lead the decipherer to assign the phonetic value of the signs

in a late or recent script to similar Indus signs if there is

104
a gap of a thousand years or more. This is the reason why

Rao did not take phonetic value of Brahmi signs into account

in the beginning for decipherment. On the other hand he

confined himself to the 18th -16th century B.C. Semitic

writing for comparison with Late Harappan Script. Here the

term Late Harappan is used for the declining phase of Mature

Harappa culture dated 1900-1600 B.C.

The inscriptions of Tell-el-Hesy (1600 B.C.), Lachish

(1250 B.C.) and Deir Alia (1500-1200 B.C.) in Jerusalem-

Palestine-Sinai Peninsula are contemporary with those of

Lothal^'*^, Rangpur^^^IIB-C (1900-1600 B.C.), Ro jdi ^ ^ N 1900-

1600 B.C), and Daimabad (1600-1200 B.C.)^^^. Lately he has

taken the Late Mohenjo-daro and Harappa Script of 1900-1750

B.C. also into account. Among the western Semites, the

Cananaites and Phoenicians had trade contacts with India even

before 14th century B.C. either directly or through the south

Arabian people who also used a Semitic Script. In Bahrain all

the eight seals of early levels carry Indus cursive signs and

Cuneiform Script appeared later here. The Late Harappan

Pottery (LHP) and Script are also found in the 16th century

B.C. levels of Bahrain. The Kassites and Phoenicians met the

Late Harappans in Bahrain. By 19th century B.C. the LHP

writing had already become a cursive alphabetic script in

Mohenjo-daro and Lothal and the Semites seem to have borrowed

signs from LHP. The LHP sign for 'm' is analogous to the sign

for this sound in south Semitic which has at least 13 more

signs resembling LHP signs (Fig. 2 2 ) . All the LHP cursive

105
signs occur with or without pictograms in the Harappan (HP)

script also. Both the Semitic and Indus Script are written

from right to left. The inscription on seals is in the

negetive and it is the mirror impression (positive) that

should be read from right to left. In very rare instances the

Indus writing seems to be from left to right. It is

reasonable to infer from the identity of more than 70% of the

Semitic cursive signs with 75% of the basic cursive signs of

the Indus writing that the analogous signs in the two scripts
had the same phonetic value.

Thus on the basis of such resemblance between the two

contemporary scripts S. R. Rao has made a thorough

investigation to determine the phonetics of various signs of

the Indus Script. The language of 137 Indus inscriptions

read in the first stage is found to belong to the Indo-

European family. In Vocabulary, Semantics and gramatical

features, it shows close affinity to Old-Indo-Aryan (OIA).

Other words which are not readily recognizable as Indo-Aryan,

are riot interpreted as such. Some of the words are

monosyllabic roots, used as nouns or adjectives. Many of

them wexe xii lairly common use in the Rq. Veda.

After reading Indus inscriptions in which signs

identical with Semitic signs occur, other inscriptions

involving the use of non-Semitic signs of 'man' and 'fish'

are read. Both the signs are fully accented and used

phonetically. As the Indus language is found to be akin to

OIA, the 'fish' and 'man' signs are given the value 's'

106
derived from 'sakula' or 'safari' a variety of fish and 'x'

derived from 'rir^' for man respectively. Rao himself has

pointed out that a few signs were used as ideographs for

instance, the 'cross-road' sign and 'triangle' with

horizontal lines.

The cursive signs are accented and joined to form

compound signs, (Fig. 20), so also some pictures e.g.

'field', 'hill', 'pipal l e a f , 'cross-road', 'scorpion' and

'triangle' with horizontal lines.

They form, com.pound signs. The only pictures not joined

are the bird and dog-like animal, the latter appearing very

rarely. In an ideographic writing the ideographs are never

joined because each picture or sign stands for an independent

idea or action. The analysis of compound signs shows that the

total number of basic signs including pictures in the

Harappan Script is 62 which got reduced to 22 in the Late

Harappan Script as a result of dropping pictures and

alternate basic cursive signs. With such a limited number of

basic signs, the Indus Script could not have been

ideographic.

A number of pictorial signs regarded as depicting the

'pipal l e a f , 'scorpion', 'bird', 'field', 'insect', 'hand',

'hill' and 'horn' are treated as phonograms and on the basis

of the initial syllables of the OIA words for these pictures.

From the words Asvattha, Vrscika, Sakunta, Ksetra, maksa

etc. the first syllable of the word namely asv, vrs, s'ak and

ksa/kse is taken for respective pictograms.

[07
 Another important point for consideration is whether all

the Indus signs stood for words. In most instances the basic

sign did not stand for a word but sometimes the accented form

of a solo sign e.g. ra, da, pa, ha, sa and compound signs

which were open or closed syllables stood for word. For

instance, ppra, pah, pak/ppaka, gr, tr/tra, bhag, mhah, sah,

ppat/pata and sas/sas are all compound signs each of which

conveyed the full sense of the words 'great', 'protect',

'guard'/'guardian', 'sing', 'save'/'saviour', 'bountiful',

'great', 'victorious', 'govern', and 'rule* respectively.

Fundamentally each cursive basic sign had a single phonetic

value and it is only the combination of signs looking like

pictures which produced a word or syllable. It is only the

sounds k^ £j_ h_j_ t , and d^ had two signs each in early stage.

The evolution from a partly logosyllabic through syllabic

into an alphabetic system is fairly clear from the

chronologically arranged seals of Lothal and those from the

latest levels of Mohenjo-daro and Dholavira.

Rao has given 120 examples of nominal compounds in Indus

seal inscriptions and listed 70 verbal bases which bear ample

testimony to the Indus language being closely related in

Semantic, vocabulary and etymology to old Indo-Aryan. He has

demonstrated that it was an inflexional language. The Indus

Script represents a pre-separation phase of the Indo-European

language, which Rao calls Proto-Indo-Aryan.

(15)
Moreover, an eminent epigraphist, Maurer who

reviewed 'Decipherment of Indus Script' says " the

108
decipherment of an unknown script, the enciphered language of

which cannot be ascertained beforehand is intrinsically bound

to be a controversial matter because, so many attempts by

scholars of highest repute have gone before. But on the basis

of Rao's methodology it can be said that he has approached

the difficult problem with praiseworthy impartiality as to

the enciphered language and its implications to the

historians ".

ANALYSIS OF COMPOUND SIGNS

Dr. S.R. Rao has analysed most of the compound signs, of

the Indus Script by adopting the following techniques only:

(a) Short strokes were added to basic signs

(b) The same basic sign was doubled to form a compound sign

(c) Short strokes were added to the doubled signs also

(d) Two and occasionally three different basic signs were

joined to form compound signs

(e) Short strokes were added to the compound signs

(f) While combining three different basic signs one of them

was doubled.

It has been found that altogether 20 basic signs are being

involved in the addition of short strokes attached to them

(Fig. 1 7 ) .

Fig. 23 shows how some basic signs are doubled to form

compound signs. It has clearly indicated here that only two

basic signs have been doubled to form four different compound

signs.

109
 The analysis of compound signs (Fig. 24) shows that

short strokes are added to the compound signs formed by

combination of either two identical or different basic

cursive signs.

It has been found that there are a number of compound

signs which are formed by joining two different basic signs

but without attaching short strokes. Fig. 18 clearly

illustrates the formation of such compound signs. It includes

13 basic signs which are involved in the formation of only 11

compound signs.

Sometimes short strokes are added to the compound signs

formed by combination of two or three different basic signs

as revealed in Fig. 20. It shows the addition of short

strokes to such compound signs that are formed in different

ways involving 16 basic signs.

Apart from these, it has been observed that there are a

number of compound signs formed by joining three, or

occasionally four, basic signs, one of which was doubled as

illustrated from the Fig. 25. It clearly points out that 14

different basic signs are involved in such combinations.

The most stricking point to be noted is that all the

individual cursive signs which are combined to form different

compound signs, occur independently so many times in the same

or different inscriptions. Comprehensive charts with regard

to the use of the individual basic sign in the formation of

various compound signs are given to substantiate the identity

of such signs.

110
 Short strokes ore added to the basic signs

u "lllF
p
Y Y
'NiA

AH
6 x,x T
7 0 (o)
0© ^

8
A,D,[>

n
tX DC
13

14

6
7
f
E
8
^
19 H o*" N
20
T FIG. 17
1111)

111
The campound signs formed by joining t*»o different
basic signs.
No. Compound sign Analysis No. Compound sign Analysis
1
^ -^ + ^ 7 i^= A + $
2 ;^ - ^ + fp 8 0 • 0 +E
3 ^ . j^+B 9 (8) -. 0 + a
4 ^ = ^ +l>C 10 :o:. 0 ^-x
5 ^ . ^ +0 II a . a +B
6 ^ =^^X
- - n , T—

F I G . 18

Late Horappon and Asbkao Brahmi Script

Late Horappan , Atokon Brahmi
No. (1900-1500 B.C.) (3rdCentury B-C.)
1 n •
2 A A
3 AQ D
4
A I E
5
G ©
6
) U
7 W W
8

9
10 tx
FIG. 19

112
 / \nalysis of the compound signs in which short strokes are being odded.

No. Compound sign Analysis No. Compound sign Analysis

1 ^ = -:^ +' +4ij 13 ^ . O+' + X
2 ^ ' ^"^'-^B 14 ^ . o+O+' + E
3 ^ = D + ' + ;^ 15 ^.0+0+^
4 ^ - - D ^ ' ^^+D+' 16 1^. o + ' + x +'
5 ^=K^'+^ 17 \3' 0 + ' +A
6 ^ = ^-h ' + V 18 r^. V+ E + ' + '
7
A^= A+ ' -^ E 19
d ' D+ E + '
8 ^:^=^ +V^' 20
$ = ^ +E+'
9
e = 0 + ' +^ 21 s^ ' 0 + 0+;^: + '
10 CF= O t U + ' 22 ^ . $+l+;jl^+'+!+'
II C^ = 0 + ^ + ' 23 ( i . 0 + E+ ' + E
12

F I G . 20

113
 Basic Cursive Signs of Indus Script identified by S.R.Rao

No Indus Cursive Signs

I
2
U
3 n
5 A
6 X
7 O
e D. A
9 v^, y^
10 )
II 0
12 o
13 • 9
14 K
15 IP
16 Y
17 t
18

19
20 E
21 S ,H .N . M
22 4-1
23
^
24
^

FIG.21

114
 Comporison of the Signs, Semitic, Early Haroppon and Late Hocoppon

No. Eorly Haroppon sign Late Haroppon sign Old North Semitic
1 D 9 D n9
2
An A A/]
3 AD AQ DA
4 i E \ ^ ^

5 y y Y /
6 HHNN a B H
7
Q 0 © 0 ©
8
\i/ \v sy U V
9 ^ * ¥
10 o 0 oo
11 -yyoo 00 )0O
12 ^ (^ AS'
13 w w u/ w
14 XA^ X fxX
15 f^r^t 4^ h
16
17
18
S
K 0<
u
X
^ 1
^

h b
f ^

19 ^S/ A ^
20
21 \
22 x
FIG. 2 2

115
The some bosic sign is doubled to form a compound sign.

No. Compound sign Analysis

1
ikik A * :k
2
(S) ' 0 + 0
3 T '0 . 0'
4 < ^ O + O
FIG .23

Short strokes are added to 1 he doubled sign

No. Compound sign Analysis

1 (§) (D = 0^0+'
2 ® , o+'^O-^'-^'
3 n
LtiU
= ^+U*t + '
LLl + i+'+Lp +'+>
4

5
^
. \i/ + y +'
6 00 • 0 + 0 *'
7 ^
•

FIG. 24

116
 Analysis of the compound signs formed by joining three different
basic Bigns of the Indus Script, one of which being doubled.

No. Compound sign Analysis Double sign (basic )

0 +0+^ (0)
(D)
0 + ' + 0+^ (0)
^ 1^ + t
V +U + V (^^')

A 0 + U+ 0 (0)
xA 0 + 0 "^u + v CO)
8 0 +0 +N CO)

9 0 + 0+ E (0)
10 0 + 0+ >^ (0)
II en • + E +E (E)
12 K+ E +E (E)
13 \y + v + U •*'X
14 0 + 0 + u+y CO)
15 0 + § ^E (E)
16 (y + V+E+E CE)
17 O + Ot'-^E (0)
S +U+ B (B)
ill
FIG .^5

117
 The analysis of the compound signs clearly shows the

process of their formation by the combination of different

basic signs:

Fig. 26 illustrates the use of the sign, with

different basic cursive signs of the Indus Script to form

about 11 different compound signs.

Similarly is the case with the sign, ' <J ' which has

been joined with six different cursive, signs to form as many

as 9 different compound signs (Fig. 27).

The most commonly used 'man' sign, ' A ' of the Indus

Script is found to combine with ten different cursive signs

in such a way that 21 different compound signs have been

formed (Fig. 28).

A very frequently used Indus sign, ' / \ ' has also been

found to combine with three different cursive signs in such a

way that it produces six different compound signs (Fig. 29).

One of the most important Indus signs is the sign, ' tl '

which has been found to occur independently in many

inscriptions as well as in the combined form with different-

cursive signs. Fig. 30 has clearly illustrated the formation

of as many as 18 different compound signs by joining with

this ' E. ' sign.

Another important basic sign, of the Indus Script

has been used, although not very frequently, to form quite a

number of compound signs by joining with five different

cursive signs as ascertained from the analysis of such

118
compound signs (Fig. 31).

Another most frequently used Indus sign, ' [J ' has been

identified by the analysis of a number of compound signs

formed by the combination of the sign, ' (J ' and different

other cursive signs. Fig. 32 clearly illustrates the

formation of 18 such compound signs in combination with this

sign.

It is intersting to find here that the most

controversial 'fish' sign ' (( ' of the Indus Script has been

found to occur independently as well as corabinedly with

other cursive signs. A few of such compound signs have been

analysed in Fig. 33.

The analysis of certain pictures and pseudo pictures

such as 'A^ ' ' 'vM;^ ' of the Indus Script has indicated

that they do not really seem to be the picture of something

or the other but compound signs are formed by joining the

symbol,
' ^ ' and ' A '
as illustrated in Fig. 34.

It is clear from the Fig. 35 that the sign, ' ^^ ' has

been combined with three different cursive signs to form

three different compound signs.

Similarly, it has been illustrated in Fig. 36 that the

sign, ' H"^ ' has not only been found to occur independently

in an inscription but also combined with different cursive

signs to form several compound signs.

The various processes of combinations of the cursive

sign, ' \ ' with other cursive signs, have been shown in

Fig. 37. It shows how this sign has been combined with five
119
different cursive signs to form five different compound

signs.

The analysis of the compound signs has revealed that

although there is only a few compound signs formed by joining

the sign, ' / ' with other cursive signs, it is highly

significant from the point of view of identification of basic

sign. Fig. 38 has clearly revealed the formation of such

compound signs by joining with this sign.

The analysis of another group of compound signs has

illustrated the use of an important Indus sign, ' 1 ' in the

formation of a number of compound signs by combining .with

different cursive signs (Fig. 39).

By analysing the compound signs (Fig. 40) the

identification of the basic sign, ' l<^ ' combined with

different cui'sive signs is easy. This has already been

ascertained to occur idependently in many inscriptions.

Apart from these, there are a few more compound signs

which were formed by the combination of an important Indus

sign, ' L-i ' with different cursive signs (Fig. 41) or strokes

added although this has been considered by many scholars as

mere a symbol of a 'field' or so.

The structural analysis of Indus signs has revealed that

several picture-like signs were produced by permutation and

combinations of only a few basic signs.

120
Anolysis of the compound signs formed by combination
of the sign/yWith different independent signs of the Indus script

Na Compound sign Analysis No. Compound Anolysis

1 * = ^-V 7 ^ ' ^ *E
2
® - O+'t^ 8
^- U-t
3 9
10
4
11
5

6 1* = v + i
FIG. 28

Analysis of the compound signs formed by combination with the

signs,'U'
No Compound sign Analysis No Compound Analysis

1
*u= * - u 6
t|>-.V.V/*U-^OKX
2 dU - ;^+Aor/j;^*U 7 ^•i§i+iC?)
3 t>= M/fU^-V 8
ty-A*U
4 ^ ' U^VfU^H/ 9 (T^-O+U+O
5
V^+H^+U-X
FIG.27

121
 *1•
Anolysisof ths compound signs formsd by combination wittiths tHliV^

No Compound sign Analysis No. Compound sign Analysis

12

2 13 /(; + A
3 14
4 15
5 16
6 17 ^ •

7 18
8
19
9
20
to

II 21
U
FIG. 2 8

122
Analysis of ths compound signs fromed by combination with the sign,'/'

No. Compound sign Analysis No. Compound sign Analyis

1
/t ' A+ ^ 4 ^- 0+0+'+/,
2 (S> • 0+UU 6

3 /0 - 0+U+A
FIG. 29

123
Analysis of the compound sign formed by combination with the sign, i C i

No. Compound sign Analysis No. Compoundaign Anolysit

I 10
2
nfn
II asy"- 0*0-E
3 12

4 \|/ +E 13 ^ . 0* 0*' '* E

5 A *E 14
6 A +E 15 CD • D* E * b
7 lli *E 16
8 0 +E
< • X * E*E
9 0 - E*E
17
^ - y tE+'+'
18

FIG. 3 0

124
 I i—11
Analysis of the compound sign formed by combination with theslga Qi

No. Compound sign Analysis No. Compound sign Anolysrs

1 5

2 6 g] - • + B
3 7

4 CI- 0 * B 8 ^ = B+ U+B
FIG.31

125
Analysis of the compound signs formed by combination with ttte s i g n / Q *

No. 1 Compound sign Analysis No. Compound sign Analysis

1
M)- i'O 10
^ • 0 . 0 *N
2 0 ^ . 0*'*0^;^ II (T- 0-0-E
3
^(31.^*0-0 12 00. 0*0*'
4 © . 0-y 13 ^. 0*0*'orO+'+0
5
a- o-u-o 14
(?)• 0*0*'
e ^ . O^'^v 15 p \ 0-X
7
ts^-O-O^U-^ 16 $= 0*' ^x
8 a . o-E 17 /e- 0*U-A
9 i;^- o-g-E 16 ^=0*0*A*'
FIG. 3 2

126
Analysis of the compound signs formed by combination withtheeign,
'^

No. Compound sign Analysis

1
^
• ^.i
2
^
0 i-^»'^+0
3
I • ^ ^ E
4
^ 4 ^i
FIG.33

127
Analysis of the compound signs formed by combinotton w i t h
the s i g n / Q •

No. Compound sign Anolysis

FIG. 34

Analysis of the compound signs formed by combination with

the s i g n ; ^ '
No. Compound sign Anolysis
1

n6.35
Anolysis of compound signs formed by combination with
the sign, ' L p *
No. Compound sign Analysis
1
^ = ^-T
2 f^ = T + T *U^E
3 = UfU + Ujij +(J+ Q
^
4 = ii|u +iijiJ + I J i-xy
\ ^

R6.36

128
Anolysis of the compound sign formed by
combinotion with the sign, ' A . '

No. Compo und sign Analysis

1 =
/K3 ^ + ^
2
A^ = /\ +I+-E
3
^
= C +V+A
4
^
= _P + § + A
5 ill
= A+ E
FIG. 37

Analysis of the compound sign formed by

combination with the sign ' ^ '
No. Compound sign Analysis

i
^ ' o +y
2 dyb OtO+u+y
3
V - U+Y+Y+V
4 \j • y ^ U ^ y or
u+y + /
FIG. 38

129
Analysis of the compound signs formed by combinotion with
the sign . ' A '
No. Compound sian Analysis
1
^ - t + V
2
f • t + ' •^ 0
3
% '
t <• 1 + / \
4 V) f + U+1-^'
5
W • t +U^'^*00
6 y • t i-1 ^ U + CC-^t+t
FIG. 39
Analysis of the compound sign "formed by combination Mvlth
the 8ign,'h;>/'

No. Compound sign Analysis

\\ • K^E +E
3 \k • X+E + E
4

A K+ E -^ E -^ E
FIG,40

130
Analysis of the compound sign formed by combination
with the sign. • Q »
- •

No. Compound sign Analysis

1
D = D ^ E + E
or • - f i l l
1 i t

2 3 D + B or n + 3
3
^ •

5 • +V
FIG. 41

131
 Picture

In addition to these basic cursive signs and the

compound signs formed from the former, there are certain

pictures representing parts of the human body (hand), plants

(pipal leaf), animals (dog and goat), birds and insects

(scorpion, ant) etc. which were used extensively in the

Harappan Script (Fig. 15). Besides, some inanimate objects

such as the 'furrowed field' and 'hill' or 'mountain' are

also represented by pictures. In fact, there are only twelve

pictures in addition to forty cursive signs in the Harappan

Script of the early and middle phases of occupation.

Significantly all the pictures except the 'field' drawn

in outline were dropped in the late seals of Mohenjo-daro,

Lothal and Rakhigadhi. In Lothal the existence of various

pseudo pictures are less frequently observed in phases IV and

V than in I - III ( 4). This will be more clear from the

period-wise distribution of pictures in the inscriptions from

Mohenjo-daro (MD), Harappa (HP), Chanhu-daro (CD), LothaJ,

Rangpur (RGP) and Rojdi (RJD) illustrated.

132
Distribution of Pictorial Signs in the Inscriptions of

Harappan and Late Harappan Script

Harappan Script Late Harappan Script

Sign MD HP CD Lothal Total Lothal RGP RJD MD (Dales)

Field 92 20 1 13 126
Pipal 41 13 2 4 60
leaf

Scorpion 35 20 1 3 59

Bird 31 4 - 4 39

Hill 30 4 - 2 36

Insect 23 6 - 4 33

Hand 24 6 2 - 32

Three 20 5 2 1 28
animal
Three
peaked
hill

Triangle

A remarkable change can be noticed in Lothal toward less

frequent use of picture compared to their use in Mohenjo-

daro and Harappa. During the final phase of the Harappa

culture in the Indus Valley and Gujarat, the Indus Script

was simplified to such an extent that almost all pictures of

'bird', 'hill', 'pipal l e a f , 'scorpion', 'hand' and 'insect'

were dropped (Fig. 11 - 1 4 ) .

133
 Numerals

Apart from the basic cursive and compound signs there are

also the numeral signs on the Indus seals. Numerals 1 to 10

and 12 are represented on the Indus seals by vertical

strokes. Except in a few instances where space is very

limited the vertical strokes for numerals 1 to 5 are written

in one line while numerals 6 to 12 are written in two or

three lines one below the other. Of course sometimes 3 to 5

also are written in two lines. Following signs stand for the

cardinal number in the Indus Script.

one

II two

111 - V three

or.. - four

or*n - five
II

111
m -i SIX

134
 seven

eight

Hi nine
111

ten
Hill
nil
twelve
nil

A few examples of inscriptions with cardinals are given in

the fig. 42.

135
 1nscriptions! Numerals wi th cursive and p i c t u r t t

No. Inscription Site Plate No. Sourca

1
^ ^M 1 HP XC 233 Vats

2
iit/^v-5' MD LXXXIX 369 Mochoy

3 SS Kill MO cvy S42 Marsholl

4
^Stiiii MD LXXXIV 90 Maokay

5
ymm^^^ 1 HP XCIX 614 Vott

6 MD CX 309 Morthall
^ p^ 1 III

7 ^iH/' HP LXXXIX 148 Vats

8
t:^ii"^ MD CXV 991 Marshall

^ l/Mli MO CVH 120 Marshall

10 Y III " 0 MD evil 131 Marshall

II
till MO CIX 220 Marshall

12
II ^ ^ l l l i MO CX 266 Marshall

13
Y nil MD CVH 133 Marsholl

14
Ylll"^ MO CVIII 197 Mortholl

15 If >lllll HP XCIX eta Volt

16
Yi;; MO CIX 243 Marshall

FIG. 42

136
 REFERENCES

1. Rao, S.R. (1982). The Decipherment of the Indus Script,

p, 22. Asia Publishing House. New Delhi.

2. Dales, G.F. (1976) - New inscriptions from Mohenjo-daro,

Pakistan, In: Kramer Anniversary vol. (ed. Barryl,

ELCHLER) Alter Orient Und Alter Testament 25, Kevelaer,

III - 123.

3. Vats, Madho Sarup (1975) Excavations at Harappa, 2 volms

Bharatiya Publishing House, Varanashi.

4. Rao, S.R. (1973) (a) Lothal and the Indus Civilization,

p, 177 ff.

(b) (1979/1985) Lothal- A Harappan Port town - 1955 -

62. vol I - 1979, vol II, 1985. MASI no. 79. New Delhi.

5. Dixit, M.G. (1950)- (a) Excavations at Rangpur , BDCRI

Poona (Dec. 1950) XI 1, 16.

(b) Rao, S.R. (1962) - (1963) - 'Excavations at Rangpur

and other explorations in Gujarat, AI, 18 and 19, pp, 5-

207.

6. (a) Bisht, R. S. (1989 - 90) Dholavira : New Horizons of

the Indus Civilization, Puratattva no. 20. pp, 71 - 82.

(b) Rao, S. R. (1991) Dawn and Devolution of the Indus

Civilization.New Delhi, pp, 272-281.

137
 (c) ibid, pp. 111 - 160.

(d) ibid, pp, p. 111 - 201

(e) Indian Archaeology ^ A Review (1966-67) p, 12

7. (a) Sali, S.A. (1986) Daimabad - 1976 - 79, Memoir of

the ASI, 83.

(b) Rao, S.R. (1978) Late Harappan Daimabad.ILN April,

74 - 75.

8. Stein Sir Aureil (a) (1931) - An Archaeological tour in

Gedrosia.MASI No. 43, pp, 60 - 65

(b) Joshi, J.P. (1974) Surkotada, A chronological

Assessment.Puratattva no. 7, pp, 34-38.

9. Possehl, G.L. et al., (1984) - Excavations at Rojdi' in

Puratattva nos. 13-14; pp, 155-164.*

10. Rao, S.R. - (1986) (a) Bet Dwarka inscription - link

between Indus and Br'ahmi Script. Sp, 32 KANAS, Hamburg,

p-247.

11. (a) Knorozov,Yu. et: a_l_ (1969). Soviet Studies on

Harappan Script.(Translated by Pande,H.C. Florida),

pp-9-10.

(b) Knorozov, Yu. V. (1968). Formal Analysis of the

Proto-Indian Text, Proto-Indica, pp, 4-18, Also brief

report on the investigation of the Proto-Indian Text'

paper presented to the viii International Congress of

Anthropological and Ethnographical Studies, Tokyo, 1968.

138
 (c) Knorozov, Yu.V. (1970) The Formal Analysis of the

Proto-Indian-Text, Journal of Tamil Studies, vol. II,

No.l, pp, 13-28.

12. Parpola, Asko (1984) 'Interpreting the Indus Script:

Wheeler Comm. vol. pp, 17 9-191.

13. Rao, S.R. (1991) Dawn and Devolution of the Indus

Civilization ^ New Delhi, p, 220.

14. Rao, S.R. (1979) Indus Valley Script 'phonetic' in

character, Indian Express 21, New Delhi, p,l.

15. Maurer, Walter Harding (1985) Journal of the American

Oriental Society 105, no.2, p, 374.

139