3,500 Year Old Indus Script Found in
Tamil Nadu
Hindu 1 May 2006
Neolithic polished stone
celt (hand-held axe) with the Indus valley script
found at Sembian-Kandiyur village, near
Mayiladuthurai in Tamil Nadu
|
A Neolithic stone celt with the Indus Valley script
has been discovered by a school teacher, V.
Shanmuganathan, in a village called Sembian-Kandiyur near
Mayiladuthurai in Nagapattinam district, Tamil Nadu. The
celt, a polished hand-held stone axe, has four Indus
Valley signs on it. The artefact with the script can be
as old as 1500 B.C., that is, 3,500 years old. The four
signs were identified by epigraphists of the Tamil Nadu
Department of Archaeology, according to its Special
Commissioner, T. S. Sridhar.
Iravatham Mahadevan, one of the world's foremost
experts on the Indus script, called the find "the
greatest archaeological discovery of a century in Tamil
Nadu." The discovery proved that the Indus script had
reached Tamil Nadu. He estimated the date of the artefact
with the script to be around 1500 B.C. "I have cautiously
and conservatively put it between 2000 B.C. and 1500
B.C.," Mr. Mahadevan said. It was in the classical Indus
script. He ruled out the possibility of the celt coming
from North India because "the material of this stone is
clearly of peninsular origin."
Harappa and Mohenjo-daro, where hundreds of seals with
the Indus script were discovered, are in present-day
Pakistan. Neolithic means New Stone Age and it is datable
in India between 2000 B.C. and 1000 B.C.
According to Mr. Mahadevan, the first sign on the celt
depicted a skeletal body with ribs. The figure is seated
on his haunches, body bent and contracted, with lower
limbs folded and knees drawn up. The second sign showed a
jar. Hundreds of this pair have been found on seals and
sealings at Harappa. Mr Mahadevan read the first sign as
"muruku" and the second sign as "an." In other words, it
is "Murukan." The earliest references in Old Tamil poetry
portrayed him as a "wrathful killer," indicating his
prowess as a war god and hunter. The third sign looked
like a trident and the fourth like a crescent with a loop
in the middle.
Mr. Mahadevan commented that the latest discovery was
very strong evidence that the Neolithic people of Tamil
Nadu and the Indus Valley people "shared the same
language, which can only be Dravidian and not
Indo-Aryan." He added that before this discovery, the
southernmost occurrence of the Indus script was at
Daimabad, Maharashtra on the Pravara River in the
Godavari Valley
Significance of Mayiladuthurai find
(Courtesy Hindu )
Links between Harappa and Neolithic Tamil Nadu
The discovery of a Neolithic stone celt, a hand-held
axe, with the Indus script on it at Sembian-Kandiyur in
Tamil Nadu is, according to Iravatham Mahadevan, "a major
discovery because for the first time a text in the Indus
script has been found in the State on a datable artefact,
which is a polished neolithic celt." He added: "This
confirms that the Neolithic people of Tamil Nadu shared
the same language family of the Harappan group, which can
only be Dravidian. The discovery provides the first
evidence that the Neolithic people of the Tamil country
spoke a Dravidian language." Mr. Mahadevan, an eminent
expert on the subject, estimated the date of the artefact
with the Indus script between 2000 B.C. and 1500 B.C.
It was in February 2006, when V. Shanmuganathan, a
school teacher living in Sembian-Kandiyur, near
Mayiladuthurai in Nagapattinam district, dug a pit in the
backyard of his house to plant banana and coconut
saplings, that he encountered two stone celts. The
teacher, who is interested in archaeology, rang up his
friend G. Muthusamy, Curator of the Danish Fort Museum at
Tranquebar, which belongs to the Tamil Nadu Department of
Archaeology. Mr. Muthusamy, who also belongs to the same
village, took charge of the two celts from his friend and
handed them over to T.S. Sridhar, Special Commissioner,
State Department of Archaeology.
When Mr. Sridhar examined one of the two stones, he
found some engravings on it. So he asked the epigraphists
of his Department to study the particular celt. To their
absolute delight, they found fours signs on it - and all
four of them corresponded with the characters in the
Indus script. When the celt with the Indus script was
shown to Mr. Mahadevan, he confirmed that they were in
the Indus script. The celt with the script measures 6.5
cm by 2.5 cm by 3.6 cm by 4 cm. It weighs 125 grams. The
other celt has no engravings on it.
Mr. Mahadevan, one of the world's foremost scholars on
the Indus and the Tamil-Brahmi scripts, is the author of
the seminal work, The Indus Script: Texts, Concordance
and Tables. It was published by the Archaeological Survey
of India, New Delhi in 1977.
First Indus sign
The first Indus sign on the celt showed a skeletal
body with ribs, seated on his haunches, body bent, lower
limbs folded and knees drawn up. The second sign shows a
jar with a handle. The first sign stood for "muruku" and
the second for "an." Together, they read as "Murukan."
They formed a very frequent combination on the Indus
seals and sealings, especially from Harappa. The first
"muruku" sign corresponded with the sign number 48, the
second with the number 342, the third, which looks like a
trident, corresponded with the sign number 367, and the
fourth with 301.
These numbers are found in the sign list published by
Mr. Mahadevan.
He said: "`Muruku' and 'an' are shown hundreds of
times in the Indus script found at Harappa. This is the
importance of the find at Sembiyan-Kandiyur. Not only do
the Neolithic people of Tamil Nadu and the Harappans
share the same script but the same language." In Tamil
Nadu, the muruku symbol was first identified from a
pottery graffiti at Sanur, near Tindivanam. B.B. Lal,
former Director-General of ASI, correctly identified this
symbol with sign 47 of the Indus script. In recent years,
the muruku symbol turned up among the pottery graffiti
found at Mangudi, near Tirunelveli in Tamil Nadu, and at
Muciri, Kerala. But this was the first time that a
complete, classical Indus script had been found on a
polished Neolithic stone celt, Mr. Mahadevan pointed out.
He emphasised that the importance of the discovery was
independent of the tentative decipherment of the two
signs proposed by him.
|
Towards a scientific study of the Indus
Script
Iravatham Mahadevan
4 February 2007, Hindu
(This article by one of the world's leading scholars
on the Indus Valley Script is based on his address at the
inaugural function of the Indus Research Centre at the
Roja Muthiah Research Library, Chennai, on January 25,
2007. Rani Siromoney has gifted her late husband Gift
Siromoney's research material on the Indus Script to the
centre; and the author said he was "only following her
noble example" in gifting his own research materials on
the subject to the IRC.)
Future research should deal both with structural analysis
of the Indus texts aided by the computer and also with
archaeological and linguistic evidence to find answers to
the riddle of the Indus Script.
I HAVE been a researcher in this field for the last four
decades. After completing the first phase of my studies
of the Tamil-Brahmi script in 1968, I turned my attention
towards the Indus Script, having been attracted by the
pioneering work of the Russian scholars led by Yuri V.
Knorozov and the Finnish scholars led by Asko Parpola.
What I found especially appealing in their brilliant work
is that, unlike all previous attempts to decipher the
Indus Script, the computer was employed to carry out
sophisticated cryptanalytical procedures on a scientific
basis. I felt that similar work should be undertaken in
India also.
In 1970, I was awarded a Jawaharlal Nehru Fellowship for
this project. In 1970-71, a photographic card catalogue
of the Harappan inscribed objects was assembled. The
Indus texts and their background data were coded in a
numerical format suitable for computer analysis. An
experimental concordance was prepared in collaboration
with K. Visvanathan with the help of an IBM 1620 computer
at the Fundamental Engineering Research Establishment in
the College of Engineering, Guindy, Chennai. Publication
of this paper brought me an offer of collaboration from
leading computer scientists at the Tata Institute of
Fundamental Research (TIFR), Mumbai. Mythili Rangarao
designed the computer programmes. Professor R.
Narasimhan, the doyen of computer scientists in India,
guided our work at TIFR.
Interdisciplinary collaboration
This interdisciplinary collaboration resulted in the
publication in 1977 of my book, The Indus Script: Texts,
Concordance and Tables, published by the Archaeological
Survey of India. As the title indicates, the book
provides the basic source material in an organised manner
for further research, but does not put forward any
particular theory of linguistic decipherment. In
retrospect, this has turned out to be a very salutary
precaution, as the Concordance is now used world over by
all researchers, whatever be their own views on the
language of the Indus Script.
In 1977, a computerised Input Data File was compiled at
TIFR; it was updated in 1980. This is the master file
from which the pictorial version of the Indus Texts and
the Concordance (published in my 1977 book) were created
through brilliant and innovative computer programmes at
TIFR. To appreciate this achievement, one must remember
that the computers of the early 1970s were much less
powerful than computers of today. We had to use punched
cards to put in the data and also to obtain the output.
There were no monitors for visual check. The pictorial
version of the Indus texts has been widely acclaimed as
aesthetically appealing and close to the originals,
providing research scholars without access to the
originals with reliable texts to pursue their own lines
of research.
Professor Gift Siromoney and his colleague, Professor
Abdul Huq, carried out further work on the Indus Script
with the help of the computer in the 1980s at the Madras
Christian College. Their collaboration resulted in the
publication of a series of brilliant research papers (and
a doctoral thesis by Abdul Huq), which explored the
structural properties of the Indus texts like frequent
combinations of signs, segmentation of texts into words,
and phrases, etc. What is especially noteworthy about
their work is its scientific character without any
pre-supposition on the linguistic affinities of the
Harappan people and the Indus Script.
Use of computers
The potentialities of the computerised Input Data File
have not been exhausted by my 1977 book or even by the
further researches by Professor Siromoney and his
colleagues. For one thing, much of the data compiled in
the file, including details on the locus and stratigraphy
of inscribed objects, are yet to be published and remain
open to further research. For another, new data are
becoming available both from the earlier sites like
Mohenjodaro and Harappa and from newer sites like
Dholavira. Stratigraphic data from sites like Lothal and
Kalibangan are still unpublished.
The format of the Input Data File now stored at the Indus
Research Centre (IRC) will permit all such additions,
enlarging the corpus of texts and their background data
for further research. I have faith that the availability
of this material in an accessible computerised form will
attract younger scholars from university departments of
mathematics, statistics, and linguistics. They can join
together in inter-disciplinary research teams to explore
further the structure of the Indus Script and ultimately
its linguistic character. Fortunately, the Roja Muthiah
Research Library (RMRL) is well equipped with the latest
computer facilities and well staffed with experts to lend
strong support to the research activities of the IRC.
The IRC proposes to conduct regular workshops and
colloquia on different aspects of the Indus Civilisation,
including especially the Indus Script. The centre will
also arrange occasional seminars inviting scholars in
India and visiting scholars from abroad to present their
research findings. In due course, I hope it will publish
regular bulletins on the work done at the centre or by
contributing scholars elsewhere. May I take this
opportunity to appeal to scholars and research
institutions engaged in similar work to let us have
copies of their books, monographs, research papers, and
other publications to enable the IRC to build up an
exhaustive library on all aspects of the Harappan
civilisation and the Indus Script?
No ideological bias
I should like to lay particular emphasis on the fact that
the IRC is a forum for scientific investigations without
any ideological bias. This does not of course mean that
the centre will not undertake research into the
linguistic aspects of the Indus Script. After all,
linguistic decipherment of the Indus Script is the
ultimate objective of research. What we mean when we say
there should be no ideological bias is that we should not
start with preconceived notions or presuppositions and
tailor our research to fit into ideology-driven
linguistic models.
Let me illustrate this statement with a couple of
examples:
Analysis of the Indus texts has now conclusively
established that the writing of the Indus Script was from
right to left (with some minor exceptions). Yet we find
some scholars claiming that the Indus Script should be
read from left to right because that is how Sanskrit (or
Tamil) scripts are written. It is clear that all attempts
to read the Indus texts generally from the left are ab
initio invalid.
Computer analysis has shown that the Indus texts possess
only suffixes, not prefixes or infixes. This indicates
that the Harappan language was of the suffixing type
(like Dravidian), not of the prefixing type (like
Indo-Aryan).
Archaelogical context
It is also necessary for well-rounded research to look
beyond the inscriptions and take the archaeological
context into account. Let me again illustrate this with
some well-known examples:
The Indus civilisation was urban in character. The Vedic
civilisation was rural and pastoral. There is hardly any
description of city life in the Rig Veda.
The Indus seals depict many animals but not the horse.
The chariot with spoked wheels is also not depicted in
the Indus art. On the contrary, these are among the main
features of the society depicted in the Rig Veda.
The Harappan religion, as far as we can make out from
pictorial representations, included the worship of
buffalo-horned male gods, mother goddesses, the pipal
tree, serpents, and probably also phallic worship. Such
modes of worship seem alien to the religion of the Rig
Veda.
These examples (among many others) make it very
improbable that the Harappan city dwellers were the same
as the people of the Vedic culture.
Substantial evidence
Ruling out the Aryan authorship of the Indus civilisation
does not of course automatically make it Dravidian.
However there is substantial evidence favouring that
supposition. I mention the most important aspects of the
evidence without going into details:
The survival of Dravidian languages like Brahui in North
India.
The presence of Dravidian loan words in the Rig Veda.
The substratum influence of Dravidian languages on the
Prakrit dialects of North India.
The evidence indicates that Dravidian languages were once
spoken widely in North India and one or more of Dravidian
dialects could well be the language of the Indus
texts.
Let me state with all the emphasis I can command that
`Aryan' and `Dravidian' are names of languages and not of
races. Speakers of one language can, and frequently did,
switch over from one language to another. We should not
allow research into the Indus civilisation and language
to be vitiated by false notions of racial or ethnic
identities.
Speakers of the Aryan languages indistinguishably merged
with speakers of Dravidian and Munda languages millennia
ago - creating a composite Indian society, culture, and
religious traditions containing elements inherited from
every source. It is thus more than likely that Indus
artistic and religious motifs and craft traditions have
survived and can be traced in the Sanskrit literature
from the days of the Rig Veda, and also in the old Tamil
traditions recorded in the Sangam poetry. This is the
basic assumption that underlies my own work on the
interpretation of the Indus Script through bilingual
parallels drawn from Sanskrit and Old Tamil works.
Quite recently, Steve Farmer and Michael Witzel proposed
that the Indus Script was not a writing system at all but
merely a collection of picture signs conveying messages
visually but not linguistically. It is difficult to take
this new theory seriously because concordances of the
Indus texts compiled by different authors (G. R. Hunter,
Parpola, and Mahadevan) are in essential agreement and
bring out obvious linguistic features like the existence
of regular sign combinations suggesting words and phrases
and grammatical elements like suffixes. Scholars like
Knorozov and Gift Siromoney working independently have
also confirmed these linguistic features. The theory that
the Indus Script is no writing at all appears to me to be
defeatist, born out of frustration reflecting the lack of
success of the decipherment efforts.
Solving the riddle
Lastly, let me also refer to the view that the Indus
Script can never be deciphered owing to the limited
material, their repetitive nature, and the absence of
bilingual records. I am optimistic that sooner or later
the riddle of the Indus Script will be solved.
My optimism is based on the following considerations.
Additional material with Indus inscriptions are being
continually unearthed from the older sites as well as
from newly discovered sites. It is quite likely that we
may reach a critical mass of inscriptions necessary for a
successful decipherment. The criticism that there has
been little or no progress towards decipherment is also
not based on facts.
While it is true that linguistic decipherment has not yet
been achieved, much preliminary work like determination
of the direction of writing, segmentation of texts into
words and phrases, and isolation of grammatical features
like suffixes has been completed. In these matters a
large measure of agreement has emerged from independent
work by different scholars; this gives us the hope that
we are progressing in the right direction towards
decipherment of the Indus Script.
I hope that future research in the IRC would deal both
with structural analysis of the Indus texts aided by the
computer and also with the archaeological and linguistic
evidence such as the ones I have mentioned above to find
acceptable answers to the riddle of the Indus Script.
|