Harappa Script – background, methodology, decipherment and significance

Mirror: http://tinyurl.com/j58aaqp

The monograph is organized in the following sections and posits the thesis that Meluhha language speakers followed the spiritual values of Veda cultural traditions, used Harappa Script inscriptions to create data archives of metalwork, accounting for Bronze Age trade transactions.

 

  1. Pre-Sanskrit civilization of Meluhha speakers. Harappa Script is hieroglyphic in nature and decipherment can be attempted the way Egyptian hieroglyphs were decrypted
  2. Preparation for the decipherment attempt
  3. Methodology developed
  4. Steps of the Decipherment with illustrations
  5. Decipherment. Instances of the decipherment covering all aspects of the matter deciphered.
  6. Harappa Script Decipherment in the context of wealth creation, evidenced by Archaeometallurgy 7. Conclusion & Executive Summary                                         8. Some select Critical comments on the decipherment by other leading experts.

Section 1. Pre-Sanskrit civilization of Meluhha speakers. Harappa Script is hieroglyphic in nature and decipherment can be attempted the way Egyptian hieroglyphs were decrypted 

 

On the salient features of Harappa (Indus) Script, some remarkable observations — related to decipherment researches — were made by John Hubert Marshall, who was Director-General of Archaeological Survey of India from 1902 to 1908 and associated with excavations of two major sites: Mohejo-daro and Harappa. That he made these observations based on the then available corpus of 541 seal impressions should be underscored. “The proper names and names of professions on these seals do not supply sufficient material for successful decipherment. It is not possible to separate word and sign groups; the declensions and verb inflections cannot be detected here, and the pronouns are entirely absent. Until longer inscriptions of a literary and historical character are discovered, not much advance in the interpretation can be expected. A good many important facts can be determined, however, to clear the ground for satisfactory research. In the first place this script is in noway even remotely connected with either the Sumerian or Proto-Elamitic signs…The Indus inscriptions resemble the Egyptian hieroglyphs far more than they do the Sumerian linear and cuneiform system. And secondly, the presence of detached accents in the Indus Script is a feature which distinguishes it from any of these systems. Although vowels must be inherent in all the signs, nevertheless some of the signs and accents must be pure vowel signs. For this reason alone it is necessary to resign further investigation to Sanskrit scholars. If future discoveries make it possible to transliterate the signs, and the language proves to be agglutinative, it will then be a problem for Sumerolotists…I am convinced that all attempts to derive the Brahmi alphabet from Semitic alphabets were complete failures…This study of the script of a pre-Sanskrit civilization of the Indus Valley is made from the material supplied by 541 impressions of small press seals.” (Marshall, J.H., 1931, Mohenjo-daro and the Indus Civilization, Repr. Asian Educational Services, 1931, Vol. I, Delhi, pp. 423-424)

 

These observations provide the framework for the decipherment attempted by this researcher who started the investigations by delineating the courses of a ‘Pre-Sanskrit’ Vedic River called River Sarasvati in North-western Bharata. Since the days of Marshall’s archaeological work of 1920’s, remarkable progress has been made by the explorations identifying over 2000 archaeological sites (or 80% out of a total of over 2600) on the Sarasvati River Basin. These explorations and limited excavations in about twenty sites have now taken the Harappa Script Corpora to a substantial size of over 8000 inscriptions making them fit for cryptographic analyses or cryptanalyses. The Corpora constitute a quantum leap from 541 seal impressions studied by Marshall.

 

Corpora of Harappa Script inscriptions

Based on numerous resources and from the collections of inscribed objects held in many museums of the world, such as the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Harappa Writing Corpora include Sarasvati heiroglyphs, representing many facets of glyptic art of Harappa Civilization. The corporas also transcribes many texts of inscriptions, corresponding to the epigraphs inscribed on objects. The compilation is based mostly on published photographs in archaeological reports right from the days of Alexander Cunningham who   discovered a seal at Harappa in 1875, of Langdon at Mohenjodaro (1931) and of Madhu Swarup Vats at Harappa (1940). The corpus includes objects collected in Bharata, Pakistan, other countries and the finds of the excavations at Harappa by Kenoyer and Meadow during the seasons 1994-1995 and 1999-2000.

Parpola’s initial corpus (CISI 1973) included a total number of 3204 texts. After compiling the pictorial corpus, Parpola notes that there are approximately 3700 legible inscriptions (including 1400 duplicate inscriptions, i.e. with repeated texts). Both the concordances of Parpola and Mahadevan complement each other because of the sort sequence adopted. Parpola’s concordance is sorted according to the sign following the indexed sign. Mahadevan’s concordance is sorted according to the sign preceding the indexed sign. The latter sort ordering helps in delineating signs which occur in final position.

Two subsequent volumes of the pictorial corpus include a total of inscriptions as collections from Bharata and Pakistan (e.g., Harappa 2590, Mohenjo-daro 2129, Lothal 281, Chanhudaro 50). Additional inscriptions have been discovered which are not included in the three volumes of Corpus of Inscriptions of Parpola et al.: e.g. Khirsara, Farmana, Gilund, Bhirrana, Kunal, Garo Biro, Rakhigarhi). Mahadevan concordance (1977) with only 2906 artifacts, excludes inscribed objects which do not contain ‘texts; for example, this concordance excludes about 50 seals inscribed with the ‘svastikā’ pictorial motif and a pectoral which contains the pictorial motif of a one-horned bull with a device in front and an over-flowing pot. Parpola concordance has been used to present such objects which also contain valuable orthographic data which may assist in decoding the inscriptions. Many broken objects are also contained in Parpola concordance which are useful, in many cases, to count the number of objects with specific ‘field symbolś, a count which also provides some valuable clues to support the decoding of the messages conveyed by the ‘field symbolś which dominate the object space. Along the Persian Gulf, in sites such as Failaka, Bahrain, Saar, nearly 2000 Harappa script inscriptions (so-called Dilmun or Persian Gulf seals) have been found on seals and sealings. These are in addition to the Gadd seals of Ancient Near East (Gadd, CJ, Seals of Ancient Bharata Style found in Ur in: Possehl, GL, ed. 1979, Ancient Cities of the Indus, Delhi, Vikas Publishing House, p.119). In many sites of Ancient Near East such as Shahdad, Susa (lady spinner artifact with Harappa script hieroglyphs, pot containing metal implements with Harappa script hieroglyphs of fish, quail, flowing water), Tepe Hissar, Haifa (three tin ingots with Harappa script found in a shipwreck), Anau, Altyn Depe (also spelt as Altin Tepe), caravan routes from Ashur and Mari to Kish, Anatolia. Many cylinder seals with cuneiform inscriptions also contain uniquely characteristic Harappa script hieroglyphs such as ‘overflowing pot’, sun’s rays, safflower, pine-cone, fish, scorpion, zebu, buffalo, hair-styles with six curls.

With the publication of CISI Vol. 3, Part 1, the total number of inscriptions from Mohenjo-daro totals 2134 and from Harappa totals 2589; thus, these two sites alone account for 4,723; bring the overall total number of inscriptions to over 6,000 from all sites (even after excluding comparable inscriptions on ‘Persian Gulf type’ circular seals from the total count).

Meluhha-Magan-Dilmun=Mesopotamia[1]

Harappa Script is a corpus of symbols constituting a logo-phonetic writing system which was used in Harappa (also known as Sarasvati-Sindhu) Civilization, during the Bronze Age from ca. 3300 BCE [1] to 600 BCE[1] in the doab of Vedic Rivers Sarasvati and Sindhu. The people and their language was called Meluhha in ancient cuneiform texts. Harappa Script inscriptions occur also in the Persian Gulf (also called Magan and Dilmun in ancient cuneiform texts), in contact areas of Mesopotamia (Ancient Near East) and in Dong Son/Karen Bronze Drums Culture areas of the Ancient Far East (L’Extrême-Orient pace George Coedes[2])

Researches have also progressed in delineating the ‘Pre-Sanskrit’ language bases of the civilization. The received wisdom of 1920’s of the framework of languages such as Sanskrit, Egyptian (Coptic), Sumerian, Elamite, Greek, Indo-European has been significantly expanded thanks to Proto-Indo-European language researches. “Proto-Indo-Europen (PIE) is the linguistic reconstruction of the common ancestor of the Indo-European languages. Since there is no written record of this language, the knowledge of it that we have has been reconstructed using historical linguistics, by comparing and extrapolating back from the properties fo the languages descended from it. It is thought that Proto-Indo-European may have been spoken as a single language (before divergence began) around 3500 BCE, though estimates vary by more than a thousand years…Today, there are about 445 living Indo-European (IE) languages descended from PIE, with Spanish, English, Hindi, Portuguese, Bengali, Russian, Punjabi, German, French and Marathi being the ten Indo-European languages with the most native speakers in descending order. PIE is thought to have had a complex system of morphology that included inflectional suffixes as well as ablaut (vowel alterations, for example, sing, sang, sung). Nouns and verbs had complex systems of declension and conjugation respectively… In 1816 Franz Bopp published On the System of Conjugation in Sanskrit in which he investigated a common origin of Sanskrit, Persian, Greek, Latin, and German. In 1833 he began publishing the Comparative Grammar of Sanskrit, Zend, Greek, Latin, Lithuanian, Old Slavic, Gothic,and German…JuliusPokorny’s Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch (“Indo-European Etymological Dictionary”, 1959) gave a detailed, though conservative, overview of the lexical knowledge accumulated up until that time. ” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-European_language ‘The original speakers may have originated in the Pontic-Caspian steppe of Eastern Europe north of the Black Sea’ or from the Ganga River Basin or Mekong-Irrawaddy-Salween River deltas in the Ancient Far East (with evidence of Austro-Asiatic or Proto-Munda languages). A major resource has been compiled called the Indian Lexicon with over 8000 semantic clusters from over 25 Ancient Languages of Bharata. Link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ykm93xf4unhordu/IndianLexicon.pdf?dl=0

Adapted from R. Bouckaert et al, Science, 2012. More than 400 Indo-European languages diverged from a common ancestral tongue; the earliest ones (top right), Anatolian and Tocharian, arose in today’s Turkey and China, respectively. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/02/mysterious-indo-european-homeland-may-have-been-steppes-ukraine-and-russia?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=facebook

 

Georges Pinault pointed to the concordance between Vedic and Tocharian: amśu ~~ ancu, ‘iron’ (Tocharian). Amśu (Vedic Sanskrit or Chandas) is a synonym for Soma. This concordance makes Soma a metaphor for metal of th Bronze Age. See Harosheth hagoyim – Smithy of nations. https://www.scribd.com/document/200092919/Harosheth-hagoyim-smithy-of-nations Harosheth hagoyim is a fortress described in the Book of Judges of the Old Bible, as the fortress or cavalry base of Sisera, commander of the army of ‘Jabin, king of Canaan’. Harosheth hagoyim ‘smithy of nations’ is cognate with kharoṣṭī खरोष्टी A kind of alphabet; Lv.1.29 PLUS gōya (Prākṛt) ‘gotra or guild or lineage’. These two anecdotal evidences point to the Harappa Script inscriptions as repositories of metalwork catalogues. Harappa writing in Ancient Near East is a tribute to the Meluhha artisans who have established an expansive contact area in Eurasia and left for posterity the bronze-age harosheth hagoyim, ‘the smithy of nations,’ an expression used in the Old Bible. This expression is cognate with Meluhha kharoṣṭī खरोष्टी goya, ‘blacksmith lip + guild’. The association of Meluhha with metalwork is discovery of a knowledge system detailing contributions of Bharata artisans to the Bronze Age Revolution, traceable to ancient times of 5th millennium BCE.

It is interesting that Dr. Moti Shemtov refers to Nahal Mishmar as Nachal Mishmar. It is similar to the identification of Meluhha and Mleccha, as cognates ! – both terms derivable from mliṣṭa म्लिष्ट [p= 837,3] mfn. spoken indistinctly or barbarously Pāṇ. 7-2 , 18, indistinct speech.

The hypothesis of this monograph is premised on the definition of mleccha (meluhha) as the spoken forms of ‘Pre-Sanskrit’ or ‘Proto-Indo-European’ (PIE). Borrowings have occurred among Dravidian, Munda and IE language-families since the present-day consensus among linguists is that Bharata was a sprachbund (language union or linguistic area) of the Bronze Age, since many language speakers absorbed language features from one another and made them their own.

Variants of hieroglyph ‘rim of jar’ in Harappa Script. This characteristic feature of Bharata sprachbund explains the sheer variety of phonetic speech forms as exemplified by the example of Santali word, kankha ‘rim of jar’, a hieroglyph which is of the most frequent occurrence in Harappa Script corpora.

The cognates of this word and concomitant semantic expansions of the Pre-Sanskrit forms such as kankha (Austro-Asiatic), kaṉṉam (Tamil) can be seen in the vocables of Indo-Aryan languages: kárṇaka m. ʻ projection on the side of a vessel, handle ʼ ŚBr. [kárṇa — ] Pa. kaṇṇaka — ʻ having ears or corners ʼ; Wg. kaṇə ʻ ear — ring ʼ NTS xvii 266; S. kano m. ʻ rim, border ʼ; P. kannā m. ʻ obtuse angle of a kite ʼ (→ H. kannā m. ʻ edge, rim, handle ʼ); N. kānu ʻ end of a rope for supporting a burden ʼ; B. kāṇā ʻ brim of a cup ʼ, G. kānɔ m.; M. kānā m. ʻ touch — hole of a gun ʼ(CDIAL 2831). கன்னம்² kaṉṉamn. < karṇa. 1. Ear; காது. கன்னமுற நாராசங் காய்ச்சிக் சொருகியபோல் (பிரமோத். 13, 16). 2. Elephant’s ear; யானைச் செவி. (திவா.) 3. [K. kanna, M. kannam.] Cheek கன்னல்¹ kaṉṉal, n. perh. கன்¹. 1. Earthen vessel, water-pot; கரகம். தொகுவாய்க் கன்னற் றண்ணீ ருண்ணார் (நெடுநல். 65). 2. Perforated hour- glass that fills and sinks at the expiration of a nāḻikai; நாழிகைவட்டில். கன்னலின் யாமங் கொள் பவர் (மணி. 7, 65). 3. Measure of time = 24 minutes; நாழிகை. காவத மோரொரு கன்னலி னாக (கந்தபு. மார்க். 142). கன்² kaṉ , n. < கல். 1. Stone; கல். (சூடா.) கன்¹ kaṉ , n. perh. கன்மம். 1. Workmanship; வேலைப்பாடு. கன்னார் மதில்சூழ் குடந்தை (திவ். திருவாய். 5, 8, 3). 2. Copper work; கன்னார் தொழில். (W.) 3. Copper; செம்பு. (ஈடு, 5, 8, 3.) 4. See கன்னத்தட்டு. (நன். 217, விருத்.)Santali glosses.

म्लेच्छित [p= 838,1] mfn. = म्लिष्ट Pa1n2. 7-2 , 18 Sch. mlecchitaka ‘speaking jargon unintelligible to others; म्लेच्छ [p= 837,3] any person who does not speak Sanskrit and does not conform to the usual Hindu institutions S3Br. &c (f(ई).); a person who lives by agriculture or by making weapons L.; n. copper L. (mleccha-mukha, mlecchAsya, mlecchākya called copper, copper – so named because the complexion of the Greek and Muhammedan invaders of India was supposed to be copper-coloured); mlecchayati ‘a person with indistinct speech’ (Dhātup. xxxii,I 20) mleccha-jāti ‘a man belonging to the Mlecchas, a mountaineer (as a Kirāta, S’abara or Pulinda)(MBh.); mlecchana ‘the act of speaking confusedly or barbarously, Dhātup.

Mleccha, as cognate of Meluhha speech is attested in Mahabharata, Jatugrihaparva which records that conversation took place between Yudhishthira and Khanaka in ‘mleccha’ tongue. It is hypothesized that Mleccha aka Meluhha was the vernacular, spoken version of what John Maynard Marshall refers to as ‘Pre-Sanskrit civilization’.

The Mekong-Irrawaddy-Salween River deltas formed by the three Himalayan glacial rivers are crucial to an understanding of the Bronze Age civilizations, because these deltas are coterminous with the largest Tin Belt of the globe. Tin was a crucial mineral to substitute for the scarcity of naturally occurring arsenical bronzes. Tin or cassiterite mineral added to copper mineral yielded Tin-Bronze which created the Bronze Age revolution, from ca. 5th millennium BCE.

 

Let us continue to use Marshall’s expression, ‘Pre-Sanskrit’ civilization, but call it populated by Meluhha speakers, a hypothesis to be tested by further researches. This is suggested because this particular language Meluhha is attested by a seal with cuneiform text which refers to the translator of the Meluhha language. The cuneiform text reads in Akkadian: ShuIlishu EME.BAL.ME.LUH.HA.KI (i.e., interpreter of Meluhha language). Roll out of Mesopotamian Cylinder seal of Shu-Ilishu. Late Akkadian ca. 2200-2113 BCE. Musee du Louvre, Paris. https://www.penn.museum/documents/publications/expedition/PDFs/48-1/What%20in%20the%20World.pdf

Another Meluhhan holding an antelope on his hands is shown on another cylinder seal. Cylinder seal described as Akkadian circa 2334-2154 BC, cf. figure 428, p. 30. “The Surena Collection of

Ancient Near Eastern Cylinder Seals.” Christies Auction Catalogue. New York City. Sale of 11 June 2001).

 

Hieroglyphic nature of Harappa (Indus) Script writing system justifies the use of rebus method to decipher and read out the plain text Meluhha inscriptions. 

 

Examples of inscriptions reviewed are:

  • Water carrier as a hieroglyph
  • Scorpion as a hieroglyph
  • Human face as a hieroglyph
  • Feeding trough as a hieroglyph

A classic paper by Cyril John Gadd F.B.A. who was a Professor Emeritus of Ancient Semitic Languages and Civilizations, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, opened up a new series of archaeological studies related to the trade contacts between Ancient Far East and what is now called Sarasvati-Sindhu (Hindu) civilization.

 

The paper was published in the Proceedings of the British Academy, XVIII, 1932.

 

Gadd presents examples of seals from Ur and considers them ‘Indian style’. Two such examples were that Seal impression No. 12 (Water-carrier) and Seal No.11 (Scorpion and Ellipse) which are presented in this monograph.

 

GR Hunter commented on Gadd’s insight in Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, 1932 pointing out that the enclosure of the pictorial moif (of water-carrier PLUS two stars on either side of the head) by ‘parenthesis’ marks is perhaps a way of splitting of the ellipse and that this is an unmistakable example of an ‘hieroglyph’ seal.

 

Water carrier as a hieroglyph

 

Seal impression. Ur. C.J. Gadd, Seals of ancient Indian style found at Ur, Proceedings of the British Academy, XVIII, 1932, pp. 11-12, Plate II, No. 12; Description: water carrier with a skin (or pot?) hung on each end of the yoke across his shoulders and another one below the crook of his left arm; the vessel on the right end of his yoke is over a receptacle for the water; a star on either side of the head (denoting supernatural?). The whole object is enclosed by ‘parenthesis’ marks. The parenthesis is perhaps a way of splitting of the ellipse (Hunter, G.R., JRAS, 1932, 476). An unmistakable example of an ‘hieroglyphic’ seal.
In the context of the water-carrier hieroglyph PLUS stars enclosed within parenthesis, CJ Gadd had rightly noted that these are determinatives that the writing system was hieroglyphic.

 

kui ‘water-carrier’ (Telugu) rebus: kuhi ‘smelter’ kuī f. ‘fireplace’ (H.); krvi f. ‘granary (WPah.); kuī, kuo house, building’(Ku.)(CDIAL 3232) kui ‘hut made of boughs’ (Skt.) gui temple (Telugu)  meha ‘polar star’ rebus: mẽht, me ‘iron’ (Santali.Mu.Ho.) dula ‘pair’ rebus: dul ‘metal casting’.

 

The most frequently occurring glyph — rim of jar — ligatured to Glyph 12 becomes Glyph 15 and is thus explained as a kanka, karaka: ‘furnace scribe’ and is consistent with the readings of glyphs which occur together with this glyph. Kan-ka may denote an artisan working with copper, ka (Ta.) kaṉṉār ‘coppersmiths, blacksmiths’ (Ta.) Thus, the phrase kaṇḍ karṇaka may be decoded rebus as a brassworker, scribe. karaka, karNIka ‘scribe, accountant’ karNi ‘supercargo’

 

Semantic expansion occurs when this hieroglyph is superscripted with ‘rim-of-jar’ hieroglyph:

Glyph15 variants (Parpola)

 

Sign 15:  kuhi kaṇḍa kanka ‘smelting furnace account (scribe)’.

kuTi ‘water-carrier’ rebus: kuThi ‘smelter’ kanda ‘pot’ rebus: kanda ‘fire-altar’ kanka, karanika ‘rim of jar’ rebus: kāraika ‘smelter producer’. Thus the hieroglyph-multiplex is an expression: kuThi kāraika ‘smelter-maker.’ kuTi karaī ‘Supercargo smelter’ (i.e. Supercargo responsible for trading produce from smelter and carried by seafaring vessel).

 

Scorpion as a hieroglyph

 

Seal; UPenn; a scorpion and an elipse [an eye (?)]; U. 16397; Gadd, PBA 18 (1932), pp. 10-11, pl. II, no. 11 Rectangular stamp seal of dark steatite; U. 11181; B.IM. 7854; ht. 1.4, width 1.1 cm.;  Woolley, Ur Excavations, IV (1956), p. 50, n.3.

 

bicha, ‘scorpion’ rebus: bica ‘haematite, ferrite ore’.

 

Hieroglyph: oval shaped bun ingot: mũhe ‘ingot’ (Santali) mũhã̄ = the quantity of iron produced from a furnace (Santali). Thus, the two hieroglyphs signify haematite ore ingot.

 

Since the insights of Gadd and Hunter in 1932, the Harappa Script Corpora has grown to include over 7000 inscriptions.

 

Hieroglyphic nature of the Harappa (Indus) Script writing system may also be seen in the following examples.

 

Human face as a hieroglyph

 

mũh ‘a face’ in Indus Script Cipher signifies mũh, muhã ‘ingot’ or muhã ‘quantity of metal produced at one time in a native smelting furnace.’

 

Inscribed tin ingot with a moulded head, from Haifa (Artzy, 1983: 53). (Michal Artzy, 1983, Arethusa of the Tin Ingot, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, BASOR 250, pp. 51-55)

 https://www.academia.edu/5476188/Artzy-1983-Tin-Ignot Face on this tin ingot: mũhe ‘face’ (Santali) Rebus: mũh ‘ingot’ (Santali).

The three hieroglyphs are: ranku ‘antelope’ Rebus: ranku ‘tin’ (Santali) ranku ‘liquid measure’ Rebus: ranku ‘tin’ (Santali). u = cross (Te.); dhatu = mineral (Santali)

Hindi. dhānā ‘to send out, pour out, cast (metal)’ (CDIAL 6771). [The ‘cross’ or X hieroglyph is incised on all three tin ingots found in a shipweck in Haifa.]

 

Feeding trough as a hieroglyph

 

Feeding trough signified in front of wild (non-domesticated) animals such as tiger, rhinoceros.

pattar ‘trough’; rebus pattar, vartaka ‘merchant, பத்தர்² pattar , n. < T. battuu. A caste title of goldsmiths; தட்டார் பட்டப்பெயருள் ஒன்று.

 

Ta. pātti bathing tub, watering trough or basin, spout, drain; pattal wooden bucket; pattar id., wooden trough for feeding animals. Ka. pāti basin for water round the foot of a tree. Tu. pāti trough or bathing tub, spout, drain. Te. pādi, pādu basin for water round the foot of a tree.(DEDR 4079)
prastha2 m.n. ʻ a measure of weight or capacity = 32 palas ʼ MBh.Pa. pattha — m. ʻ a measure = 1/4 āḷhaka, cooking vessel containing 1 pattha ʼ; NiDoc. prasta ʻ a measure ʼ; Pk. pattha — , °aya — m. ʻ a measure of grain ʼ; K. path m. ʻ a measure of land requiring 1 trakh (= 9 1/2 lb.) of seed ʼ; L. patth, (Ju.) path m. ʻ a measure of capacity = 4 boras ʼ; Ku. pātho ʻ a measure = 2 seers ʼ; N. pāthi ʻ a measure of capacity = 1/10 man ʼ; Bi. pathiyā ʻ basket used by sower or for feeding cattle ʼ; Mth. pāthā ʻ large milk pail ʼ, pathiyā ʻ basket used as feeding trough for animals ʼ; H. pāthī f. ʻ measure of corn for a year ʼ; Si. pata ʻ a measure of grain and liquids = 1/4 näliya ʼ. *prasthapattra — .Addenda: prastha — 2: WPah.poet. patho m. ʻ a grain measure about 2 seers ʼ (prob. ← Ku. Mth.

ˊtra n. ʻ drinking vessel, dish ʼ RV., °aka — n., pātrīˊ– ʻ vessel ʼ Gr̥ŚrS. [√pā1]
Pa. patta — n. ʻ bowl ʼ, °aka — n. ʻ little bowl ʼ, pātĭ̄ — f.; Pk. patta — n., °tī — f., amg. pāda — , pāya — n., pāī — f. ʻ vessel ʼ; Sh. păti̯ f. ʻ large long dish ʼ (← Ind.?); K. pāthar, dat. °trasm. ʻ vessel, dish ʼ, pôturu m. ʻ pan of a pair of scales ʼ (gahana — pāth, dat. pöċü f. ʻ jewels and dishes as part of dowry ʼ ← Ind.); S. ri f. ʻ large earth or wooden dish ʼ, roo m. ʻ wooden trough ʼ; L. pātrī f. ʻ earthen kneading dish ʼ, parāt f. ʻ large open vessel in which bread is kneaded ʼ, awāṇ. pātrī ʻ plate ʼ; P. pātar m. ʻ vessel ʼ, parāt f., parātā m. ʻ large wooden kneading vessel ʼ, ḍog. pāttar m. ʻ brass or wooden do. ʼ; Ku.gng. pāi ʻ wooden pot ʼ; B. pātil ʻ earthern cooking pot ʼ, °li ʻ small do. ʼ Or. pātia°tui ʻ earthen pot ʼ, (Sambhalpur) sil — pā ʻ stone mortar and pestle ʼ; Bi. patĭ̄lā ʻ earthen cooking vessel ʼ, patlā ʻ milking vessel ʼ, pailā ʻ small wooden dish for scraps ʼ; H. patīlā m. ʻ copper pot ʼ, patukī f. ʻ small pan ʼ; G. pātrũ n. ʻ wooden bowl ʼ, pātelũ n. ʻ brass cooking pot ʼ, parāt f. ʻ circular dish ʼ (→ M. parāt f. ʻ circular edged metal dish ʼ); Si. paya ʻ vessel ʼ, päya (< pātrīˊ — ). *kācapātra — , khaḍgapātra — , tāmrapātra — .pāthá — m. ʻ way, path ʼ Pāṇ.gaṇa. [pánthā — ]śabdapātha — .Addenda: ˊtra — : S.kcch. pātar f. ʻ round shallow wooden vessel for kneading flour ʼ; WPah.kṭg. (kc.) pərāt f. (obl. — i) ʻ large plate for kneading dough ʼ ← P.; Md. tilafat ʻ scales ʼ (+ tila < tulāˊ — )(CDIAL 8055).

Mth. pāthā ʻ large milk pail ʼ, pathiyā ʻ basket used as feeding trough for animals ʼTu. pāti trough or bathing tub. These variant pronunciations in Maithili and Tulu indicate the possibility that the early word which signified a feeding trough was pattha, patthaya ‘measure of grain’ (Prakrtam). The suffix -mar in Pattimar which signifies a dhow, seafaring vessel is related to the word.

 

Procession of animals as a hieroglyph set

 

Harappa (Indus) Script inscription on a Mohenjo-daro tablet (m1405) including ‘rim-of-jar’ glyph as component of a ligatured glyph (Sign 15 Mahadevan)

 

This inscribed object is decoded as a professional calling card: a blacksmith-precious-stone-merchant with the professional role of copper-miner-smelter-furnace-scribe-Supecargo

 

m1405At Pict-97: Person standing at the center points with his right hand at a bison facing a trough, and with his left hand points to the ligatured glyph.

 

The inscription on the tablet juxtaposes – through the hand gestures of a person – a ‘trough’ gestured with the right hand; a ligatured glyph composed of ‘rim-of-jar’ glyph and ‘water-carrier’ glyph (Sign 15) gestured with the left hand.

 

A characteristic feature of Indus writing system unravels from this example: what is orthographically constructed as a pictorial motif can also be deployed as a ‘sign’ on texts of inscriptions. This is achieved by a stylized reconstruction of the pictorial motif as a ‘sign’ which occurs with notable frequency on Indus Script Corpora — with orthographic variants (Signs 12, 13, 14).

Signs 12 to 15. Indus script:

 

Indus inscription on a Mohenjo-daro tablet (m1405) including ‘rim-of-jar’ glyph as component of a ligatured glyph (Sign 15 Mahadevan) This tablet is a clear and unambiguous example of the fundamental orthographic style of Indus Script inscriptions that: both signs and pictorial motifs are integral components of the message conveyed by the inscriptions. Attempts at ‘deciphering’ only what is called a ‘sign’ in Parpola or Mahadevan corpuses will result in an incomplete decoding of the complete message of the inscribed object.

 

This inscribed object is decoded as a professional catalogue calling card: a blacksmith-precious-stone-merchant with the professional role of copper-miner-smelter-furnace-scribe-Supercargo.

 

The inscription on the tablet juxtaposes – through the hand gestures of a person – a ‘trough’ gestured with the right hand; a ligatured glyph composed of ‘rim-of-jar’ glyph and ‘water-carrier’ glyph (Glyph 15) gestured with the left hand.

 

The Pali expression usu — kāraika — m. ʻ arrow — maker ʼ provides the semantics of the word kāraṇika as relatable to a ‘maker’ of a product. usu-kāraṇika is an arrow-maker. Thus, kuTi kāraṇika can be explained as a smelter-maker. Supercargo is a representative of the ship’s owner on board a merchant ship, responsible for overseeing the cargo and its sale. The Marathi word for Supercargo is: kārī. Thus, it can be suggested that kuTi kāraṇika was an ovrseer of the cargo (from smelter) on a merchantship. In the historical periods, the Supercargo has specific duties “The duties of a supercargo are defined by admiralty law and include managing the cargo owner’s trade, selling the merchandise inports to which the vessel is sailing, and buying and receiving goods to be carried on the return voyage…A new supercargo was always appointed for each journey who also had to keep books, notes and ledgers about everything that happened during the voyage and trade matters abroad. He was to present these immediately to the directors of the Company on the ship’s return to its headquarters.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercargo While a captain was in charge of navigation, Supercargo was in charge of trade.

कारण 1[p= 274,2] a number of scribes or कायस्थs W. instrument , means;that on which an opinion or judgment is founded (a sin, mark; a proof; a legal instrument, document), Mn. MBh.

 

कारणिक [p= 274,3] mfn. (g. काश्य्-ादि) ” investigating , ascertaining the cause ” , a judge Pan5cat. a teacher MBh. ii , 167.

 

  1. kerāʻ clerk ʼ (kerāni ʻ id. ʼ < *kīraka — karaika<-> ODBL 540): very doubtful. — Poss. ← Ar. qāri‘, pl. qurrā‘ ʻ reader, esp. of Qur’ān ʼ.(CDIAL 3110) कर्णक kárṇaka, kannā ‘legs spread‘, ‘rim of jar’, ‘pericarp of lotus’ karaṇī ‘scribe, supercargo’, kañi-āra ‘helmsman’.  kāraṇika m. ʻ teacher ʼ MBh., ʻ judge ʼ Pañcat. [kā- raa — ] Pa. usu — kāraika — m. ʻ arrow — maker ʼ; Pk. kāraiya — m. ʻ teacher of Nyāya ʼ; S. kāriī m. ʻ guardian, heir ʼ; N. kārani ʻ abettor in crime ʼ; M. kārī m. ʻ prime minister, supercargo of a ship ʼ, kul — karī m. ʻ village accountant ʼ.(CDIAL 3058) kāraṇa n. ʻ cause ʼ KātyŚr. [√kr̥1] Pa. kāraa — n. ʻ deed, cause ʼ; Aś. shah. karaa — , kāl. top. kālana — , gir. kāraa — ʻ purpose ʼ; Pk. kāraa — n. ʻ cause, means ʼ; Wg. (Lumsden) “kurren” ʻ retaliation ʼ, Paš. kāran IIFL iii 3, 97 with (?); S. kārau m. ʻ cause ʼ; L. kārnā m. ʻ quarrel ʼ; P. kāra m. ʻ cause ʼ, N. A. B. kāran, Or. kāraa; Mth. kāran ʻ reason ʼ, OAw. kārana, H. kāran m., G. kāra n.; Si. karua ʻ cause, object, thing ʼ; — postpositions from oblique cases: inst.: S. kāraie°i ʻ on account of ʼ, L. awāṇ. , Addenda: kāraṇa — : Brj. kāran ʻ on account of ʼ.(CDIAL 3057) kiraka m. ʻ scribe ʼ lex.

 

eraka ‘raised arm’ Rebus: eraka ‘metal infusion’ (Kannada. Tulu)

 

Sign 15:  kuhi kaṇḍa kanka ‘smelting furnace account (scribe)’.
Thus, the hieroglyph multiplex on m1405 is read rebus from r.: kuhi kaṇḍa kanka eraka bharata pattar‘goldsmith-merchant guild — helmsman, smelting furnace account (scribe), molten cast metal infusion, alloy of copper, pewter, tin.’

m290 tiger PLUS trough

m276

h088 Rhinoceros PLUS trough

h1966A h1966B

 

 

 

m1486B Text 1711

Obverse: karibha ‘trunk of elephant’ ibha ‘elephant’ rebus: kariba ‘iron’ ib ‘iron’ khAr ‘blacksmith’. Thus, ironsmith.

Reverse: Inscription of hypertext:

baTa ‘rimless pot’ Rebus: bhaTa ‘furnace’ PLUS muka ‘ladle’ rebus; mū̃h ‘ingot’, quantity of metal got out of a smelter furnace (Santali)

kolom ‘three’ Rebus: kolimi ‘smithy, forge’

Doubling of this signifies dula ‘pair’ rebus: dul ‘cast metal’. Thus doubling of the right parenthesis results in a hieroglyph-multiplex as shown on the elephant copper plate inscription m1486 text

 

This hieroglyph-multiplex is thus read as: kuilika ‘bent, curved’ dula ‘pair’ rebus: kuila, katthīl = bronze (8 parts copper and 2 parts tin)

 

The ‘curve’ hieroglyph is a splitting of the ellipse. kuila ‘bent’ CDIAL 3230 kuṭi— in cmpd. ‘curve’, kuika— ‘bent’ MBh.
Rebus: kuila, katthīl = bronze (8 parts copper and 2 parts tin) cf. āra-kūṭa, ‘brass’  Old English ār ‘brass, copper, bronze’ Old Norse eir ‘brass, copper’, German ehern ‘brassy, bronzen’. kastīra n. ʻ tin ʼ lex. 2. *kastilla — .1. H. kathīr m. ʻ tin, pewter ʼ; G. kathīr n. ʻ pewter ʼ.2. H. (Bhoj.?) kathīl°lā m. ʻ tin, pewter ʼ; M. kathīl n. ʻ tin ʼ, kathlẽ n. ʻ large tin vessel ʼ.(CDIAL 2984)

 

Hieroglyphs: कौटिलिकः kauṭilikḥ कौटिलिकः 1 A hunter.-2 A blacksmith. कौटिलिक

[p= 315,2] m. (fr. कुटिलिका Pa1n2. 4-4 , 18) ” deceiving the hunter [or the deer Sch.] by particular movements ” , a deer [” a hunter ” Sch.] Ka1s3. f. ( Pa1n2. 4-4 , 18) कुटिलिका crouching , coming stealthily (like a hunter on his prey ; a particular movement on the stage) Vikr. कुटिलिक ” using the tool called कुटिलिका ” , a blacksmith ib. कुटिलक [p= 288,2] f. a tool used by a blacksmith Pa1n2. 4-4 , 18 Ka1s3.mfn. bent , curved , crisped Pan5cat.

 

The hieroglyph-multiplex may be a variant of split ellipse curves paired: dula ‘pair’ rebus: dul ‘cast metal’ PLUS mū̃h ‘ingot’ (Paired split ellipse or a pair of right parentheses) — made of — kuila, katthīl = bronze (8 parts copper and 2 parts tin)

karNika ‘rim of jar’ rebus: karNI ‘supercargo’; karNaka ‘account’; Alternative: kanka ‘rim of jar’ rebus: kanga ‘brazier’.

 

Thus, the entire inscription is a metalwork catalogue: supercargo of iron, cast bronze metal ingots, out of smithy furnace and forge.

Trough PLUS buffalo/bull

Other examples of trough as a hieroglyph on Indus writing seals shown in front of animals.

 

A trough is shown in front of some domesticated animals and also wild animals like rhinoceros, tiger, elephant. The trough glyph is clearly a hieroglyph, in fact, a category classifier. Trough as a glyph occurs on about one hundred inscriptions, though not identified as a distinct pictorial motif in the corpus of inscriptions. Why is a trough shown in front of a rhinoceros which was not a domesticated animal? A reasonable deduction is that ‘trough’ is a hieroglyph intended to classify the animal ‘rhinoceros’ in a category.

 

ḍhangar ‘trough’; ḍhangar ‘bull’; rebus: ḍhangar ‘blacksmith’

 

Chanhudaro22a hangar ‘bull’. Rebus: hangar‘blacksmith’ pattar ‘trough’. Rebus: pattar (Ta.), battuḍu (Te.) goldsmith guild (Tamil.Telugu) khō ‘alloyed ingot’;kolmo ‘rice plant’. Rebus: kolami ‘smithy’. koi ‘flag’ (Ta.)(DEDR 2049). Rebus: ko ‘workshop’ (Kuwi) Vikalpa: baddī = ox (Nahali); baḍhi = worker in wood and metal (Santali)ḍāngrā = a wooden trough just enough to feed one animal. cf. iḍankar̤i = a measure of capacity, 20 iḍankar̤i make a par-r-a (Ma.lex.) ḍangā = small country boat, dug-out canoe (Or.); ḍõgā trough, canoe, ladle (H.)(CDIAL 5568). Rebus: ḍānro  term of contempt for a blacksmith (N.) (CDIAL 5524)

 

Stamp seal with a water-buffalo, Mohenjo-daro. “As is usual on Indus Valley seals that show a water buffalo,this animal is standing with upraised head and both hornsclearly visible. (Mackay, 1938b, p. 391). A feeding trough is placed in front of it, and a double row of undecipherable script fills the entire space above. The horns are incised to show the natural growth lines. During the Akkadian period, cylinder seals in Mesopotamia depict water buffaloes in a similar pose that may have been copied from Indus seals (see cat. No.135)(For a Mesopotamian seal with water buffalo, see Parpola1994, p. 252 and Collon 1987, no.529 – Fig. 11).”(JMK –Jonathan Mark Kenoyer, Professor of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Madison) (p.405). பத்தர்¹ pattar , n. 1. See பத்தல், 1, 4, 5. 2. Wooden trough for feeding animals; தொட்டி. பன்றிக் கூழ்ப்பத்தரில் (நாலடி, 257).

 

 

Hieroglyph: pattar ‘trough’ Rebus: pattharaka ‘merchant’ pattar ‘guild, goldsmith’.

 

Ta. pātti bathing tub, watering trough or basin, spout, drain; pattal wooden bucket; pattar id., wooden trough for feeding animals. Ka. pāti basin for water round the foot of a tree. Tu. pāti trough or bathing tub, spout, drain. Te. pādi, pādu basin for water round the foot of a tree.(DEDR 4079)

prastha
2 m.n. ʻ a measure of weight or capacity = 32 palas ʼ MBh.Pa. pattha — m. ʻ a measure = 1/4 āḷhaka, cooking vessel containing 1 pattha ʼ; NiDoc. prasta ʻ a measure ʼ; Pk. pattha — , °aya — m. ʻ a measure of grain ʼ; K. path m. ʻ a measure of land requiring 1 trakh (= 9 1/2 lb.) of seed ʼ; L. patth, (Ju.) path m. ʻ a measure of capacity = 4 boras ʼ; Ku. pātho ʻ a measure = 2 seers ʼ; N. pāthi ʻ a measure of capacity = 1/10 man ʼ; Bi. pathiyā ʻ basket used by sower or for feeding cattle ʼ; Mth. pāthā ʻ large milk pail ʼ, pathiyā ʻ basket used as feeding trough for animals ʼ; H. pāthī f. ʻ measure of corn for a year ʼ; Si. pata ʻ a measure of grain and liquids = 1/4 näliya ʼ. *prasthapattra — .Addenda: prastha — 2: WPah.poet. patho m. ʻ a grain measure about 2 seers ʼ (prob. ← Ku. Mth.

ˊtra n. ʻ drinking vessel, dish ʼ RV., °aka — n., pātrīˊ– ʻ vessel ʼ Gr̥ŚrS. [√pā1]
Pa. patta — n. ʻ bowl ʼ, °aka — n. ʻ little bowl ʼ, pātĭ̄ — f.; Pk. patta — n., °tī — f., amg. pāda — , pāya — n., pāī — f. ʻ vessel ʼ; Sh. păti̯ f. ʻ large long dish ʼ (← Ind.?); K. pāthar, dat. °trasm. ʻ vessel, dish ʼ, pôturu m. ʻ pan of a pair of scales ʼ (gahana — pāth, dat. pöċü f. ʻ jewels and dishes as part of dowry ʼ ← Ind.); S. ri f. ʻ large earth or wooden dish ʼ, roo m. ʻ wooden trough ʼ; L. pātrī f. ʻ earthen kneading dish ʼ, parāt f. ʻ large open vessel in which bread is kneaded ʼ, awāṇ. pātrī ʻ plate ʼ; P. pātar m. ʻ vessel ʼ, parāt f., parātā m. ʻ large wooden kneading vessel ʼ, ḍog. pāttar m. ʻ brass or wooden do. ʼ; Ku.gng. pāi ʻ wooden pot ʼ; B. pātil ʻ earthern cooking pot ʼ, °li ʻ small do. ʼ Or. pātia°tui ʻ earthen pot ʼ, (Sambhalpur) sil — pā ʻ stone mortar and pestle ʼ; Bi. patĭ̄lā ʻ earthen cooking vessel ʼ, patlā ʻ milking vessel ʼ, pailā ʻ small wooden dish for scraps ʼ; H. patīlā m. ʻ copper pot ʼ, patukī f. ʻ small pan ʼ; G. pātrũ n. ʻ wooden bowl ʼ, pātelũ n. ʻ brass cooking pot ʼ, parāt f. ʻ circular dish ʼ (→ M. parāt f. ʻ circular edged metal dish ʼ); Si. paya ʻ vessel ʼ, päya (< pātrīˊ — ). *kācapātra — , khaḍgapātra — , tāmrapātra — .pāthá — m. ʻ way, path ʼ Pāṇ.gaṇa. [pánthā — ]śabdapātha — .Addenda: pāˊtra — : S.kcch. pātar f. ʻ round shallow wooden vessel for kneading flour ʼ; WPah.kṭg. (kc.) pərāt f. (obl. — i) ʻ large plate for kneading dough ʼ ← P.; Md. tilafat ʻ scales ʼ (+ tila < tulāˊ — )(CDIAL 8055).

Mth. pāthā ʻ large milk pail ʼ, pathiyā ʻ basket used as feeding trough for animals ʼTu. pāti trough or bathing tub. These variant pronunciations in Maithili and Tulu indicate the possibility that the early word which signified a feeding trough was pattha, patthaya ‘measure of grain’ (Prakrtam). The suffix -mar in Pattimar which signifies a dhow, seafaring vessel is related to the word.

 

Section 2. Preparation for the decipherment attempt

 

Preparation for the decipherment effort is in two parallel stages: Stage 1. Compilation of the Harappa Script Corpora; and Stage 2. Compilation of the Bharata sprachbund lexicon called Indian Lexicon.as a comparative dictionary for over 25 ancient languages of Bharata in semantic clusters to reconstruct the phonetic forms of the language spoken by the creators of the Corpora. Since the preliminary indicators point to the Corpora to be metalwork catalogues, these two parallel stages are complemented by the compilation of data archives related to archaeo-metallurgy in respect of 1. Metal alloys and 2. Cire Perdue (lost-wax) techniques of metalcastings.

A tribute has to be paid to many savants who have researched into Harappa Script ever since 1875 when Alexander Cunningham published a surface find of Harappa seal with Harappa script. Many concordance lists have been compiled. Many inscriptions are not restricted to the River Basins of Rivers Sarasvati and Sindhu (Indus) but extend over an expansive contact area which stretches from Hanoi (Vietnam, e.g. Dong Son Bronze Drum) to Haifa (Israel, three pure tin ingots with Harappa Script).

Mari in relation to Persian Gulf. The concordance lists constitute the Harappa Script Corpora which now number more than 8000, thanks to the discoveries of Persian Gulf or Dilmun seals and also artifacts such as the sculptural frieze of Spinner lady with Harappa Script hieroglyphs, now in Louvre Museum or Standard of Mari held in a procession. The standard upheld by the central figure is itself an emphatic hieroglyph because the post which holds the standard of ‘one-horned young bull’ a very frequently used hypertext in Harappa Script Corpora, is neither a stick nor rod, but ‘culm of millet’. karb ‘culm of millet’ rebus: karba ‘iron’. kaambákalamba — 1, m. ʻ end, point, stalk of a pot- herb ʼ lex. [See kadambá — ] B. kaamba ʻ stalk of greens ʼ; Or. kaambā°mā stalks and plants among stubble of a reaped field ʼ; H. kakarbī f. ʻ tubular stalk or culm of a plant, esp. of millet ʼ (→ P. karb m.); M. kaḍbā m. ʻ the culm of millet ʼ. — Or. kaḷama ʻ a kind of firm — stemmed reed from which pens are made ʼ infl. by H. kalam ʻ pen ʼ ← Ar.? (CDIAL 2653) Rebus: Ta. ayil iron. Ma. ayir, ayiram any ore. Ka. aduru native metal. Tu. ajirda karba very hard iron.  (DEDR 192)  (a) Ta. karu black; To. kary- (kars-) to be singed, scorched, fried too much; (karc-) to heat (new pot, etc., to purify it); kary charcoal; ka, kax, kaxt black; kabïn iron; Ka. kabbiṇa iron; Te. krã̄gu to be burned; Go. (Tr. W.) karw-, (SR. Ph.) karv-, (Mu.) kar-, kaṛ- to burn (intr.); (G. Ma. Ko.) karv-, (Ph.) karsahtānā, (Mu.) kaṛih- id. (tr.); (Mu.) kaṛha field for burning cultivation (Voc. 563); (Grigson) kare area set apart for penda cultivation when left fallow for a term (Voc. 536); (Ma.) gaŋga darkness, mist (Voc.1016); (Mu.) kark- rice to burn while cooking; (Ko.) karr- to be charred or burnt (Voc. 539)  (DEDR 1278)

खोंड (p. 122khōṇḍa m A young bull, a bullcalf) one-horned young bull and karb ‘culm of millet’ (Punjabi), respectively. (NOTE: कोंद kōnda ‘engraver, lapidary setting or infixing gems’ is a phonetic variant of a worker with gold and lathe: kunda ‘fine gold, lathe.

Panel standard of Mari shell limestone and bitumen, Mari Temple of Ishtar, Early Dynastic period, w: 72 cm from the Early Dynastic – Northern Mesopotamian Period, 2900 BCE – 2350 BCE.

Copper rein ring ca. 2750 BCE Tomb of Queen Puabi of Ur. https://67.media.tumblr.com/b8e5d9edad7568e304eb2d5c4004bc05/tumblr_inline_o50zc0kXEo1t79fgm_540.jpg

“The central figure has been reconstructed as carrying an animal standard which is in fact a rein ring similar to the electrum one found in the death pit of Puabi in the Royal Cemetery at Ur. Both the Mari and Ur standards were constructed using a shell-inlay technique and bitumen.” http://www.newsnfo.co.uk/pages/sheeple%20war%20sheep%20emblem%20carrier%20.htm

bāga ʻbridle, rein’ (Oriya)Valgā वल्गा A bridle, rein; आलाने गृह्यते हस्ती वाजी वल्गासु गृह्यते Mk.1.5; also वल्गः (in the same sense); वङ्कावलग्नैक- सवल्गपाणयः Śi.12.6. వల్గ (p. 1140) valga valga. [Skt.] n. A bridle, a rein. గుర్రపుకళ్లెము తగిలించేవాగె. వాగ. valgā f. ʻ bridle ʼ Mr̥cch. [S. L. P. poss. indicate earlier *vālgā — ] Pk. vaggā — f. ʻ bridle ʼ; K. wag f. ʻ rein, tether ʼ; S. vāg̠a f. ʻ rein, halter ʼ (whence vāg̠aṇu ʻ to tie up a horse ʼ); L. (Ju.) vāg̠ f. ʻ rein ʼ, awāṇ. vāg; P. vāgbāg f. ʻ bridle ʼ, N. bāg — ḍori; B. bāg ʻ rein ʼ; Or. bāga ʻ bridle, rein ʼ, gaja — bāga ʻ elephant goad ʼ; Bi. bāg — ḍor ʻ tether for horses ʼ; Mth. Bhoj. bāg ʻ rein, bridle ʼ, OAw. bāga f., H. bāg f. (→ K. bāg — ḍora m., M. bāg — dor); G. vāg f. ʻ rein, guiding rope of a bullock ʼ; M. vāg — dor m. ʻ bridle ʼ. Addenda: valgā — and *vālgā — [Dial. a ~ ā < IE. o (Lett. valgs ʻ rope, cord ʼ) T. Burrow BSOAS xxxviii 72] (CDIAL 11420)

 

bãg f. ʻ tin, lead, calx of tin ʼ (Hindi) vaṅga1 n. ʻ tin, lead ʼ lex. [Cf. raṅga — 3, nāga — 2] S. vaṅga f. ʻ calx of tin (used as an aphrodisiac) ʼ, P. vaṅgbaṅg f.; H. bãg f. ʻ tin, lead, calx of tin ʼ, bãgā ʻ having a metallic or brackish taste (of water) ʼ(CDIAL 11195) vaṅgḥ वङ्गम् 1 Lead. -2 Tin; ताम्रं लोहं च वङ्गं च काचं च स्वर्णमाक्षिकम् Śiva B.3.11. -Comp. वङ्गः -अरिः yellow orpiment. -ज 1 brass. -2 red lead. -जीवनम् silver. -शुल्यजम् bell- metal (कांस्य).

 

Thus, the karb ‘culm of millet’ rebus: karba ‘iron’ PLUS bāga ʻbridle, rein’ rebus: bãg f. ʻ tin, lead, calx of tin ʼ (Hindi) PLUS खोंड (p. 122khōṇḍa m A young bull, a bullcalf) one-horned young bull rebus: कोंद kōnda ‘engraver, lapidary setting or infixing gems’ is a phonetic variant of a worker with gold and lathe: kunda ‘fine gold, lathe.

Thus, the Mari procession of the Mari standard is a celebration of three metals: kunda, ‘fine gold’ PLUS bãg ‘tin, lead, calx of tin’ PLUS karba ‘iron’.

Section 3. Methodology developed

There are enormous documented resources available from ancient texts of Bharata for trying out various methods. This resource relates to the method of documenting a research and is called tantra yukti. This method of research documentation in over 32 categories. The method is also called, in the context of mathematical and astronomical researches as Yuktibhāā (Malayalam: യുക്തിഭാഷ; “Rationale in the Malayalam/Sanskrit language”[(K V Sarma; S Hariharan (1991). “Yuktibhāṣā of Jyeṣṭhadeva: A book on rationales in Indian Mathematics and Astronomy: An analytic appraisal” in: Indian Journal of History of Science. 26 (2), pp. 185-207.) http://web.archive.org/web/20060928203221/http://www.new.dli.ernet.in/insa/INSA_1/20005ac0_185.pdf

Yukti or rationale is evaluated in terms of the meanings and many categories such as 32 devices listed in Arthaśāstra:

अधिकरण (topic), विधानं (statement of contents), योगः (employment of sentences),पदार्थः (meaning of the word), हेत्वर्थः (reason), उद्देशः (mention), निर्देशः (explanation), उपदेशः (advice), अपदेशः (reference),अतिदेशः (application), प्रदेशः (indication), उपमानं (analogy), अर्थापत्ति (implication), संशयः (doubt), प्रसंगः (situation), विपर्ययः (contrary), वाक्यशेषः (completion of a sentence), अनुमतं (agreement), व्याख्यानं (emphasis), निर्वचनं (derivation), निदर्शनं (illustration),अपवर्ग (exception), स्वसंज्ञा (technical term), पूर्वपक्षः (prima facie view), उत्तरपक्षः (correct view), एकान्तः (invariable rule), अनागतावेक्षणं (reference to a future statement), अतिक्क्रंत्तातवेक्षणं (reference to a past statement), नियोगः (restriction),  विकल्प (option, alternative), समुच्चय (combination), ऊह्यं (what is understood). (Kautilya Arthas’Astra, Vol. II, 1972, Delhi, MLBD).

 

तत्रायुर्वेदः शाखा विद्या सूत्रं ज्ञानं शास्त्रं लक्षणं तन्त्रमित्यनर्थान्तरम्

Tantra is synonymously used with äyurveda, a branch of Veda, education, aphorism,

knowledge, s’Astra and definition. (Carakasamhitä, siddhisthänam, uttaravastisiddhih ,12 adhyäyaù, s’lokaù 29, 30 païcamakhANDah, Edited and Revised by Kaviraja Narendranath Sengupta, Kaviraja Balaichandra Sengupta, Caukhambä Orientalia Varanasi–1, 1991 (Reprinted)

https://www.academia.edu/12132105/Tantrayukti

समुच्चय (combination) method is apparent from the orthographic device of combining animal parts to सांगडणें (p. 495) sāṅgaḍaṇēṃ v c (sangada), that is,  ‘To link, join, or unite together (boats, fruits, animals).’ Similar combination occurs on other hieroglyphs, the so-called signs, using the ‘ligatures’, for e.g. by infixing short linear strokes within ‘rim of jar’ or by ligaturing the ‘water-carrier’ hieroglyph with a ‘rim of jar’. सांगड (p. 495) sāṅgaḍa is thus ‘f A body formed of two or more (fruits, animals, men) linked or joined together.’ It is also a lathe or a joined canoe called ‘catamaran’,  सांगड (p. 495) sāṅgaḍa m f (संघट्ट S) A float composed of two canoes or boats bound together.

Such a समुच्चय (combination) method is referred to as ‘hypertexting’ in modern computer jargon to signify cross-referencing between sections of text and associated graphic material.

Harappa Script inscriptions are very short. The average number of ‘text signs’ is 5 with or without pictorial motifs or field symbols on seals and tablets. The short texts and the 400+ symbols on ‘sign list’ are pointers to the logo-phonetic nature of the Script. These ‘signs’ are NOT pictograms but logograms because they represent words in Harappa language. Unfortunately, many attempts at decipherment were premised on a conjecture of alphabetical or syllabic nature of the Script and searching for ‘names or titles or sentences composed of morphemes and grammatical units such as prepositions’ on the assumption that the seals and tablets should have recorded names or titles or even poems of prayer. Such assumptions ignored the essentially pictorial nature of the Script composed of hieroglyphs both as ‘text signs’ and as ‘pictorial motifś and pictorial narratives such as a tiger looking back and a person sitting on a tree branch. An approach frameḍ on the hypothesis that Harappa Script was necessitated for trade transactions to cope with the Bronze Age Revolution, provides a framework for the use of rebus method evidenced on Egyptian hieroglyphs which are rebus renderings of consonants in words (See discussions on rebus readings of hieroglyphs which are complete messages on Narmer palette and on Ivory tags with one to four hieroglyphs, from U-J of Abydos tomb dated to ca. 32nd cent. BCE). Thus, it will be a futile and speculative exercise to look for long texts in Harappa Script which has achieved comprehensive messaging to render utterances in Harappa language, using rebus principle to compose hypertexts in Meluhha cipher (pairs of homonymous words, one set signifying logograms and another set signifying similar sounding metalwork catalogue items).

The hypertext principle of Harappa Script is demonstrated effectively by Dennys Frenez and Massimo Vidale[3] for Harappa Script, identifying pictorial components which constitute a composite orthographic construction as in the example of a composite animal orthographed by various parts of various animals on m0300 Mohenjo-daro seal. Orthographic components are identified and explained by Dennys Frenez and Massimo Vidale.

The evidence is remarkable that many single glyphs or glyptic elements of the Harappa writing can be read rebus using the repertoire of artisans (lapidaries working with precious shell, ivory, stones and terracotta, mine-workers, stone-masons, metal-smiths working with a variety of minerals, furnaces and other tools) who created the inscribed objects and used many of them to authenticate their trade transactions. Many of the inscribed objects are seen to be calling cards of the professional artisans, listing their professional skills and repertoire. Many are veritable mining- and metal-work catalogs.

Continuing legacies of glyptic art noted by Huntington: “There is a continuity of composite creatures demonstrable in Indic culture since Kot Diji ca. 4000 BCE.”[4]

The identification of glosses from the present-day languages of Bharata on Sarasvati river basin is justified by the continuation of culture evidenced by many artifacts evidencing civilization continuum from the Vedic  Sarasvati River basin, since language and culture are intertwined, resulting in a unique, logo-semantic writing system. .

Over 7000 inscriptions of Harappa Script are metalwork documents. Data mining techniques are applied to this Corpora for knowledge discovery about aspects of the Bronze Age Revolution such a: 1. Cire perdue lost-wax technique for creating metal sculptures of exquisite beauty and artistry (e.g. dancing girl bronze statue of Mohenjodaro); and 2. Techniques of alloying of minerals to create hard alloys necessary to forge useful tools, implements, weapons, pots and pans; 3. Organization of guilds of artisans and merchants as Corporate forms to control the works-in-process (e.g. circular platforms of Harappa) and shipment of cargo of metalwork merchandise using dhows, seafaring vessels.

Tin-Bronze Revolution as a trans-Eurasian phenomenon is attested by archaeological discoveries of artifacts and ancient cuneiform text records, which validate Harappa Script inscriptions, datable to ca. 5th-4th millennium BCE.

Harappa Script is mlecchita vikalpa cryptography, uses rebus method of substitution cipher

 

Mlecchita vikalpa is an expression used as the 52nd item in the list of 64 arts learnt by youth (Chapter 3, Part 1, Vatsyayana’s Kamasutra dated to ca. 1st cent. CE). Translators Richard Burton, Bhagavanlal Indrajit, Shivaram Parashuram Bhide explain the expression mlecchita vikalpa as ‘the art of understanding writing in cipher’ or cryptography or, simply, encryption.

Definition of terms

The intended message is plain text and the encrypted vikalpa (alternative representation) is ciphertext. Decrypting the ciphertext using Meluhha (mleccha) language of Bharatiya sprachbund (language union), is decipherment of Harappa Script. Mleccha of Meluhha is the reconstructed spoken form characterized by mispronunciations and variant spellings identified from the comparative lexicon of over 25 ancient languages of Bharata (called Indian Lexicon)

 

Potsherd. Harappa. Ca. 3300 BCE (HARP Harvard Archaeology Project) Three hieroglyphs. tagaraka ‘tabernae montana’ rebus (substitution of similar sounding word): tagara ‘tin’. Note: The discovery of tin as an alloying mineral with copper to substitute for Arsenical bronze, to create Tin-Bronzes created the Bronze Age revolution. This writing system could be one of the earliest writing systems in the story of civilization. The date of this potsherd compares with the date of bone/ivory tags with Egyptian hieroglyphs discovered in Abydos U-j tomb ca. 3200 BCE. It is remarkable that the writing systems of Egyptian hieroglyphs, cuneiform texts on cylinder seals with pictorial motifs which include Harappa Script hieroglyphs were invented ca. 3000 BCE almost simultaneously with the invention of Harappa Script ca. 3300 BCE.

Yasodhara’s Jayamangala (13th cent.) is a commentary on Kamasutra and describes that the mlecchita vikalpa method of writing is ‘substitution cipher’ and that — as in the methods called Kautiliyam and Muladeviya–, the letter substitutions are based on phonetic relations.

Kautiliyam is a mlecchita named after Kautilya, the author of the ancient Indian political treatise, the Arthaśāstra. In this system, the short and long vowels, the anusvara and the spirants are interchanged for the consonants and the conjuncts. The following table shows the substitutions used in the Kautiliyam cipher. The characters not listed in the table are left unchanged.

a ā i ī u ū e ai o au ñ ś s i r l u
kh g gh ch j jh ñ ṭh ḍh th d dh n ph b bh m y r l v

Muladeviya is also called Gudhalekhya. The cipher alphabet of Muladeviya consists of the reciprocal one specified in the table below.

a kh gh c t ñ n r l y
k g p m s ś

See: Friedrich L Brauer (2007). Decrypted Secrets: Methods and Maxims of Cryptology. Springer. p. 47.  Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mlecchita_vikalpa

Cryptanalysis or breaking of codes and ciphers is the method to decipher Harappa Script writing system. Atbash (name derived from first, last, second and second to last Hebrew letters, Aleph-Tav-Beth-Shrin) is a method of monoalphabetic substitution cipher dated to ca. 600 BCE. In this cipher, the modern Hebrew alphabet would be:

Plain אבגדהוזחטיכלמנסעפצקרשת
Cipher תשרקצפעסנמלכיטחזוהדגבא

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atbash

The reference to kautiliyam is significant because the text of Kautilya is titled Kauilīya

Arthaśāstram, ‘the science of wealth creation’.

The glyphs of the Harappa script or Harappa Writing include both pictorial motifs and signs. Both categories of glyphs are read rebus. As a first step in delineating the Harappa language, an Indian lexicon provides a resource, compiled semantically in clusters of over 1240 groups of words/expressions from ancient Bharata languages as a Proto-Indic substrate dictionary.

 

Rebus method to signify phonetic sounds of words, is a logo-phonetic writing system

 

The writing system seems to use the rebus principle to phonetize its hieroglyphs. Such a rebus principle is seen in ca. 3100 BCE Egyptian hieroglyphs of Narmer and Abydos tomb. At Tomb UJ at Abydos in Upper Egypt (dated to ca. 3250 BCE), Dreyer found place names written in Egyptian hieroglyphs (up to four in number) recognizable as hieroglyphs which persisted and were employed during later periods and which are written and read phonetically. The rebus principle may explain the pictorial motifs of some cylinders of Ancient Near East of ca. 3100 BCE.

 

Ivory tags from tomb UJ of Umm El Qa’ab at Abydos. The hieroglyphs possibly signified specific goods and localities. Dryer notes: “As most of the signs manifest themselves as hieroglyphics in the dynastic period (i.e. after 3170 BCE or so), and since their later arrangement can already be observed in the beginning, it makes sense to take them, at least in part, not simply as symbols/markers, but to read them like hieroglyphics…Also other groups of signs can be read with the same phonetic values…The stork beside the chair (No. 103)…b..st = Basta. The fact that names of places occur among the signs, can be proven on a non-decipherable (nicht lesbaren) sign, the wrestlers, which are (also) inscribed as a hieroglyphic, identifying a place on the pallet of cities in one of the city-rings. A series of tags with the combination of tree + animal can be read, similarly to inscriptions on vessels, as designations of commodities that are named after their originator…Although it is often difficult to decide whether a sign is an ideogram or a phonogram. In some cases only one definitive interpretation is possible.” (loc.cit. Richard Mattessich, 2002, The oldest writings, and inventory tags of Egypt, A review essay of Gunter Dreyer’s Umm El-Quaab I-Das pradynastische Konigsgrab U-j und seine fruhen Schriftzeugnisse, in: The Accounting Historians Journal 29 (June 2002), pp. 195-208; Contaduria No. 41, Medellin, September 2002). https://aprendeenlinea.udea.edu.co/revistas/index.php/cont/article/viewFile/25609/21149

Clearly, the ivory and bone tags of royal tomb U-j Abydos were inventory tags (‘vouchers’ or ‘inventory labels’) with some accounting information. Early token and token-envelope accounting systems of Mesopotamia were also precursors of the syllabic cuneiform writing.

 

The hieroglyphs on inventory tags not merely show but say. Thus a remarkable advance has occurred over pictographic writing as it moved into the phase of logographic writing.

Hieroglyphs: N’r M’r (N’r ‘cuttle fish’ M’r ‘awl’) rebus: Narmer (king’s name of 33rd cent. BCE in Egypt).

“ Linguistic terminology makes it possible to identify the various units of language that helped to transform communication in early Egypt from merely pictorial expression to speech writing, which is important in identifying the nature of early graphic material:

“1) Logograms: symbols representing specific words

“2) Phonograms: symbols representing specific sounds

“3) Determinatives: symbols used for classifying words

“Moreover, writing on the tags shows that the Egyptian writing system had adopted the rebus principle, which broadened the meaning of symbols to include their homophones—words with the same sound but different definitions…” (Elise V. Macarthur, “The Concept and Development of the Egyptian Writing System” IN: Woods (ed), Visible Language. Inventions of Writing in the Middle East and Beyond [2010] 120).

 

Early writing from Abydos was used to label containers. (Courtesy Günter Dreyer)

Bone/ivory tags measuring 2 by 1 ½ cms. With one to four glyphs, clay seal impressions bearing hieroglyphs were unearthed by Germn Archaeological Institute from the tomb of predynastic ruler Scorpion at Abydos, south of Cairo. These are dated  to ca. 3400-3200 BCE and constitute the earliest examples of Egyptian hieroglyph writing. “According to Jim Allen of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, such early hieroglyphs represent a rebus system, akin to modern Japanese, in which pictures are used according to the way they sound. In early phonetic systems  phrases such as “I believe,” for example, might be rendered with an eye, a bee, and a leaf. The Abydos hieroglyphs are simple precursors to the complex hieroglyphic forms discovered at later sites such as Metjen and Turin.”

http://archive.archaeology.org/9903/newsbriefs/egypt.html

Mlecchita vikalpa exemplifies tantra yukti, the Bharatiya method of composing a writing system. Tantra can be termed as that which discusses and details subjects and concepts; yukti is “… that which removes blemishes like impropriety, contradiction, etc., from the intended meaning and thoroughly joins the meanings together.” The expression, Tantra-yukti denotes those devices that aid the composition of a text in a systematic manner to convey intended ideas clearly. Cakrapāṇi lists 40 distinct devices of tantra yukti; 32 or more of these devices are exemplified in the treatises of Suśruta, Caraka, Vāgbhaṭa, Kautilya, Panini on knowledge domains of Ayurveda, Arthas’Astra and grammar of Samskrtam. Caraka notes:

तंत्रेसमासव्यासोक्ते भवन्त्येता हि क्रत्स्नशः एकदेशने दृश्यन्ते समासाभिहिते तथा ‘all these tantrayukti-s occur in a scientific work in brief and in detail. But only some of them occur in a work written in brief.”

 

A characteristic feature of the structure and form of Harappa script is crispness of expression. This is governed by the cardinal principle of tantra yukti :

स्फुटता न पदैरपाकृता  न च न स्वीकृत मर्थगौरवम् ‘Crispness (of an expression) is not obliterated by verbosity, nor is the depth of meaning that is intended to be conveyed compromised (to attain crispness).

 

Precision of speech expression is achieved by unambiguously orthographed devices of hieroglyphs signified by images of wild and domestic animals (tiger, elephant, rhinoceros, boar, buffalo, zebu, ox, goat, markhor, ram, serpent hood), narratives such as a tiger or an antelope with head turned backwards, an archer or person seated in penance, a worshipper, tumblers, drummer, ficus religiosa leaf, claws of crab, rice-plant sprout, pincers, harrow, comb, scarf, lid of jar, rim of jar, rimless pot, ladle, stool, hayrick, platform, crocodile, frog, turtle, fish, fish-eye, quail, duck or aquatic birds, black ant, svastika, fire-altar, hillock, mountain-range, twig or sprig, numerical markers – one, two, three, four to signify numeral words. Semantic expansion to signify speech expressions is achieved by the ‘crispness’ feature of ligaturing combining animal heads, animal parts, infixed or circumscribed or superscripted hieroglyph multiplexes creating hypertexts. Such hypertexts have been matched with words and expressions of Harappa language (Meluhha) using the lexis of Indian Lexicon. Such words and expressions of animals, etc. hieroglyph-muliplexes have homonyms (rebus, similar sounding words) in the parole(speech forms) of Meluhha (again using the lexis of Indian Lexicon). All the homonyms for words and expressions so discovered relate to metalwork catalogues.

 

Some typical tantra yukti devices in the narratives of Harappa Script Corpora are: upamānam (or दृष्टान्तdRṣṭānta or analogy), vākyaviśea (completion of a sentence meaningfully even in the absence of a word which is understood),

pūrvapaka (objections, prima facie or provisional view), uttarapaka (correct view or answers). These devices are among 32 devices inArthaiśāstra list of Tantra yukti. Nidarśana (illustration) The illustration of the devices of tantra yukti occurs on a cylinder seal from Ancient Near East. Cylinder Seal of Ibni-Sharrum Agade period, reign of Sharkali-Sharri (c. 2217-2193 BCE) Mesopotamia Serpentine H. 3.9 cm; Diam. 2.6 cm Formerly in the De Clercq collection; gift of H. de Boisgelin, 1967 AO 22303 The signifiers: rango ‘buffalo’ rebus: rango ‘pewter’ lo‘overflow’ kanda ‘pot’ rebus: lokhanda ‘metal implements’ baTa ‘six’ rebus: bhaTa ‘furnace’ meD ‘curl’ rebus:meD ‘iron’. Thus, Ibni-Sharrum is a smelter working with pewter and metal implements.

Another example is a Mohenjodaro pectoral. m1656 Mohenjodro The message of the inscription is a Dharma sajñā ‘responsibility indicator’: arranger, manager of metal implements.

Hieroglyph: sãghāṛɔ ‘lathe, brazier’.(Gujarati). Rebus:  सं-ग्रह  sagraha, samgaha  ‘a guardian , ruler , manager , arranger’ R. BhP. Vajra Sanghāta ‘binding together’ (Varahamihira) *sagaha ʻ collection of forts ʼ. [*gaḍha — ]L. sãgah m. ʻline of entrenchments, stone walls for defenceʼ.(CDIAL 12845).

Hieroglyph: खोंड (p. 216) [khōṇḍa] m A young bull, a bullcalf; खोंडा [ khōṇḍā ] m A कांबळा of which one end is formeḍ into a cowl or hood. खोंडरूं [ khōṇḍarū ] n A contemptuous form of खोंडा in the sense of कांबळा-cowl (Marathi. Molesworth[17])e dūa bull calf (Telugu); e ‘young bullock’ (Konda)Rebus: kõdā ‘to turn in a lathe’ (Bengali) Rebus 2: koTiya ‘dhow, seafaring vessel’. ṇḍam காண்டம்² ṇṭam, n. < ṇḍa. 1. Water; sacred water Rebus: khāṇḍā ‘metal tools, pots and pans’ (Marathi) (B) {V} lo “(pot, etc.) to ^overflow”. See `to be left over’. @B24310. #20851. Re(B) {V} “(pot, etc.) to ^overflow”. See `to be left over’. (Munda ) Rebus: loh ‘copper’ (Hindi) The hieroglyph clearly refers to the metal tools, pots and pans of copper.

 

Section 4. Steps of the Decipherment with illustrations

 

When hieroglyphs or hypertexts are ‘organized’ on an object, for e.g. a seal, there is an integral unity in the message (plain text) intended for communication. The Bogazkoy seal is intended to create a seal impression, say, on a cargo consignment by a metal merchant. All the hieroglyph components of the inscription have to be read together to generate a sentence. In this case, the sentence reads: three mineral ores metal casting.

 

Bogazkoy seal impression with ‘twisted rope’ hieroglyph (ca. 18th cent. BCE) मेढा [ mēḍhā ]twist (rope) rebus: mẽht, me ‘iron (metal)’ and a cognate word,मृदु mṛdu ‘iron’ (Samskritam)

 *skambha2 ʻ shoulder — blade, wing, plumage ʼ. [Cf. *skapa — s.v. *khavaka — ]S. khambhu°bho m. ʻ plumage ʼ, khambhui f. ʻ wing ʼ; L. khabbh m., mult. khambh m. ʻ shoulder — blade, wing, feather ʼ, khet. khamb ʻ wing ʼ, mult. khambhaā m. ʻ fin ʼ; P. khambh m. ʻ wing, feather ʼ; G. khā̆m f., khabhɔ m. ʻ shoulder ʼ. (CDIAL 13640) rebus: kammaTa ‘mint, coiner, coinage’ eruvai ‘kite’ rebus: eruvai ‘copper’ dhAv ‘strand’ rebus1: dhAv ‘mineral, element’ rebus2. dhAvaD ‘smelter’.dula ‘two’ rebus: dul ‘metal casting’

 

 

m1406 Hieroglyphs: thread of three stands + drummer + tumblers

 

dhollu ‘drummer’ (Western Pahari) dolutsu ‘tumble’ Rebus: dul ‘cast metal’

 

karaa ‘double-drum’ Rebus: karaa ‘hard alloy’.

dhAtu, dhAv
 ‘strands of rope’ Rebus: dhAtu ‘mineral, metal, ore’

Kalibangan seal. k020 Hieroglyphs: thread of three strands + water-carrier + one-horned young bull.  kuTi ‘water-carrier’ Rebus: kuThi ‘smelter’. dhAv ‘strands of rope’ rebus: dhAv ‘element, ore’; dhAtu id.

The following three examples from Mehrgarh, Mohenjo-daro and Banawali show acrobats in bull-jumping or buffalo-leaping.

Mehrgarh. Terracotta circular button seal. (Shah, SGM & Parpola, A., 1991, Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions 2: Collections in Pakistan, Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, MR-17. A humped bull (water buffalo?) and abstract forms (one of which is like a human body) around the bull. The human body is tossed from the horns of the bovine.

m0312 Persons vaulting over a water buffalo. The water buffalo tosses a person on its horns. Four or five bodies surround the animal. Rounded edges indicate frequent use to create clay seal impressions.

Impression of a steatite stamp seal (2300-1700 BCE) with a water-buffalo and acrobats. Buffalo attack or bull-leaping scene, Banawali (after UMESAO 2000:88, cat. no. 335). A figure is impaled on the horns of the buffalo; a woman acrobat wearing bangles on both arms and a long braid flowing from the head, leaps over the buffalo bull. The action narrative is presented in five frames of the acrobat getting tossed by the horns, jumping 6

and falling down.Two Indus script glyphs are written in front of the buffalo. (ASI BNL 5683).

Rebus readings of hieroglyphs: ‘1. arrow, 2. jag/notch, 3. buffalo, 4.acrobatics’:

  1. kaṇḍa ‘arrow’ (Skt.) H. kãḍerā m. ʻ a caste of bow — and arrow — makers (CDIAL 3024). Or. kāṇḍa, kã̄ṛ ʻstalk, arrow ʼ(CDIAL 3023). ayaskāṇḍa ‘a quantity of iron, excellent iron’ (Pāṇ.gaṇ)
  2. खाांडा [ khāṇḍā ] m A jag, notch, or indentation (as upon the edge of a tool or weapon). (Marathi) Rebus: khāṇḍā ‘tools, pots and pans, metal-ware’.
  3. rāngo ‘water buffalo bull’ (Ku.N.)(CDIAL 10559) Rebus: rango ‘pewter’. ranga, rang pewter is an alloy of tin, lead, and antimony (anjana) (Santali).
  4. ḍullu to fall off; ḍollu to roll over (DEDR 2698) Te. ḍul(u)cu, ḍulupu to cause to fall; ḍollu to fall; ḍolligillu to fall or tumble over (DEDR 2988) డొలుచు [ḍolucu] or ḍoluṭsu. [Tel.] v. n. To tumble head over heels as dancing girls do (Telugu) Rebus 1: dul ‘to cast in a mould’; dul mẽṛhẽt, dul meṛeḍ, ‘cast iron’; koṭe meṛeḍ ‘forged iron’ (Santali) Bshk. ḍōl ʻ brass pot (CDIAL 6583). Rebus 2: WPah. ḍhōˋḷ m. ʻstoneʼ, ḍhòḷṭɔ m. ʻbig stone or boulderʼ,

ḍhòḷṭu ʻsmall id.ʼ Him.I 87(CDIAL 5536). Rebus: K. ḍula m. ʻ rolling stoneʼ(CDIAL 6582).

Decipherment of free-hand, painted inscription on a gold pendant-needle

 

2.5 inch long Mohenjo-daro gold pendant has a 0.3 inch nib; its ending is shaped like a nib of a stylus pen or sewing or netting needle. It bears an inscription painted (perhaps with ferric oxide pigment) in Harappa Script. This inscription is deciphered as a proclamation of metalwork competence.

 

Hieroglyph, needle: ákati1, akáyati ʻ ties ʼ Dhātup. 2. *añcati.1. S. ākau ʻ to stitch ʼ, ã̄ko m. ʻ a stitch ʼ Rebus:akaśālā — , akakaś° f. ʻ mint ʼ lex. [ṭaṅka — 1, śāˊlā — ]N. aksāl°ār, B. āksālã̄k°ek°, Bhoj. aksār, H. aksāl°ār f., G. ãksā f., M. ã̄ksālāk°ãk°ak°. — Deriv. G. aksāī m. ʻ mint — master ʼ, M. āksāyā m. Addenda: akaśālā — : Brj. aksāī, °sārī m. ʻ mint — master ʼ (CDIAL 5434)

kanac ‘corner’ Rebus: kancu ‘bronze’; sal ‘splinter’ Rebus: sal ‘workshop’; u ‘crosś(Telugu) a  ‘cross road’ Rebus: dhatu ‘mineral’; bhaa ‘furnace’; gaṇḍa ‘four’ Rebus: khaṇḍa ‘implements; kolmo ‘three’ Rebus:kolimi ‘smithy, forge’; Vikalpa: ?ea ‘seven’ (Santali); rebus: ?eh-ku ‘steel’ (Te.)

aya, ayo ‘fish’ Rebus: aya ‘iron'(Gujarati) ayas ‘metal’ (Rigveda) khambhaā ‘fish fin’ rebus: kammaa ‘mint, coiner, coinage’

The inscription is a professional calling card — describing professional competence of aksāī m.  āksāyā m. ‘mint master’ (Gujarati.Marathi) and ownership of specified items of property — of the wearer of the pendant.

Thus, the inscription is: aksāī m.  āksāyā ‘mint master’ PLUS kancu sal (bronze workshop), dhatu aya kaṇḍkolimi kammaa ‘mineral, metal, fire-altar, workshop, mint, coiner, coinage’ mineral, metal, furnace/fire-altar smithy.

 

Three such needles are identified by John Marshall, in the excavation report.[5]

Section 5. Decipherment. Instances of the decipherment covering all aspects of the matter deciphered.

 

Harappa Script is a mlecchita vikalpa which employs the method of word or expression substitution cipher, i.e. substituting the word or expression signified by a picture with a similar-sounding word or expression (called homonym).

 

Harappa Script uses the method of word substitution cipher which can be called rebus, i.e. substituting the word signifying a hieroglyph with a similar-sounding word to convey the intended meaning, plain message. Thus, original pictorial message in cipher is substituted by the plain message.

 

For example, the picture of ‘rim of jar’ signifies the expression kanda kankha (variant pronunciation karika). This pictorial expression is substituted by a similar-sounding expression to signify the plain text: khāṇḍā ‘tools, pots and pans, metal-ware’ PLUS karī ‘supercargo, a representative of the ship’s owner on board a merchant ship, responsible for overseeing the cargo and its sale.”; karika ‘helmsman’. Thus, the picture ‘rim of jar’ signifies rebus: khāṇḍā karika ‘(metal) equipment, (metal) ware helmsman, supercargo, clerk (accountant)’.

loaficus glomerata’ rebus: loh ‘copper’ PLUS

kaṇḍa kankha ‘rim of jar’ rebus: khāṇḍā karī, karika ‘metal equipment account scribe, supercargo’.

 

khōṇḍa m A young bull, a bullcalf rebus: kunda ‘fine gold’.

Thus, the inscription with three hieroglyphs on the seal conveys the inventory of: copper, gold of supercargo, a representative of the ship’s owner on board a merchant ship, responsible for overseeing the cargo and its sale.

The young bull is a hypertext with a number of hieroglyph components: one-horned young bull + rings on neck + pannier

खोंड (p. 122khōṇḍa m A young bull, a bullcalf) one-horned young bull and karb ‘culm of millet’ (Punjabi), respectively. (NOTE: कोंद kōnda ‘engraver, lapidary setting or infixing gems’ is a phonetic variant of a worker with gold and lathe: kunda ‘fine gold, lathe.’ खोंड  [khōṇḍa] m A young bull, a bullcalf. (Marathi) खोंडा [khōṇḍā] m A कां बळा of which one end is formed into a cowl or hood; खोंडरूं (p. 216) [ khōṇḍarūṃ ] n A contemptuous form of खोंडा in the sense of कांबळा -cowl. (Marathi) khōṇḍa A tree of which the head and branches are broken off, a stock or stump Rebus: kõdār ‘turner’ (Bengali); kõdā ‘to turn in a lathe’ (Bengali). koiya ‘rings on neck’, ko ‘horn’ rebus: ko ‘workshop’. కోడియ (p. 326iya కోడె (p. 326e  [Tel.] n. A bullcalf. kodeduda. A young bull (Telugu) (NOTE: the hieroglyph is a hypertext composed of young bull, one horn, pannier (a कां बळा ‘sack’ of which one end is formed into a cowl or hood), rings on neck.)

The importance of the ‘jar’ khāṇḍā can be seen from the use of the jar as cargo container, exemplified by the discovery of Susa pots as storage devices. A particular storage pot which contained metal implements from Meluhha is the defining archaeological evidence for the semantics of the ‘rim-of-jar’: ‘metal equipment account scribe, supercargo’. This is a rivetting evidence for the purport of the entire Harappa Script corpora of over 8000 inscriptions since the ‘rim-of-jar’ hieroglyph occurs in about 70% of the inscriptions.

Below the rim of the storage pot, the contents are described in Harappa Script hieroglyphs/hypertexts: 1. Flowing water; 2. fish with fin; 3. aquatic bird tied to a rope Rebus readings of these hieroglyphs/hypertexts signify metal implements from the Meluhha mint.

Clay storage pot discovered in Susa (Acropole mound), ca. 2500-2400 BCE (h. 20 ¼ in. or 51 cm). Musee du Louvre. Sb 2723 bis (vers 2450 avant J.C.)

The hieroglyphs and Meluhha rebus readings on this pot from Meluhha are: 1. ṇḍa ‘water’ rebus: khāṇḍā ‘metal equipment’; 2. aya, ayo ‘fish’ rebus: aya ‘iron’ ayas ‘metal alloy’; khambhaṛā ‘fish fin’ rebus: kamma a ‘mint, coiner, coinage’ 3.  करड m. a sort of duck — f. a partic. kind of bird ; S. karaṛa -ḍhī˜gu m. a very large aquatic bird (CDIAL 2787) karaṇḍa‘duck’ (Samskrtam) rebus: karaā ‘hard alloy’; PLUS 4. meh ‘rope tying to post, pillar’ rebus me‘iron’ med ‘copper’ (Slavic)

Susa pot is a ‘Rosetta stone’ for Harappa Script

 

Water (flow)

Fish fish-fin

aquatic bird on wave (indicating aquatic nature of the bird), tied to rope, water

ṇḍa ‘water’   rebus: ṇḍa ‘implements

The vase a la cachette, shown with its contents. Acropole mound, Susa.[20]

It is a remarkable ‘rosetta stone’ because it validates the expression used by Panini: ayaskāṇḍa अयस्–काण्ड [p= 85,1] m. n. ” a quantity of iron ” or ” excellent iron ” , (g. कस्का*दि q.v.). The early semantics of this expression is likely to be ‘metal implements compared with the Santali expression to signify iron implements: meď ‘copper’ (Slovāk), mẽht,khaṇḍa (Santali)  मृदु mdu,’soft iron’ (Samskrtam).

Santali glosses.

Harappa Script hieroglyphs painted on the jar are: fish, quail and streams of water;

aya ‘fish’ (Munda) rebus: aya ‘iron’ (Gujarati) ayas ‘metal’ (Rigveda) khambhaā ‘fin’ rebus: kammaa ‘mint’ Thus, together ayo kammaa, ‘metals mint’

baa ‘quail’ Rebus: bhaa ‘furnace’.

karaṇḍa ‘duck’ (Sanskrit) karaa ‘a very large aquatic bird’ (Sindhi) Rebus: करडा karaḍā ‘Hard from alloy–iron, silver &c’. (Marathi) PLUS meRh ‘tied rope’ meh f. ʻ rope tying oxen to each other and to post on threshing floor ʼ (Lahnda)(CDIAL 10317) Rebus: mūhā mẽht = iron smelted by the Kolhes and formeḍinto an equilateral lump a little pointed at each end;  mẽht, me ‘iron’ (Mu.Ho.)

Thus, read together, the proclamation on the jar by the painted hieroglyphs is: baa meh karaā ayas kāṇḍa ‘hard alloy iron metal implements out of the furnace (smithy)’.

 

This is a jar closed with a ducted bowl. The treasure called “vase in hiding” was initially grouped in two containers with lids. The second ceramic vessel was covered with a copper lid. It no longer exists leaving only one. Both pottery contained a variety of small objects form a treasure six seals, which range from Proto-Elamite period (3100-2750 BCE) to the oldest, the most recent being dated to 2450 BCE (First Dynasty of Ur).

 

Therefore it is possible to date these objects, this treasure. Everything included 29 vessels including 11 banded alabaster, mirror, tools and weapons made of copper and bronze, 5 pellets crucibles copper, 4 rings with three gold and a silver, a small figurine of a frog lapis lazuli, gold beads 9, 13 small stones and glazed shard.

“In the third millenium Sumerian texts list copper among the raw materials reaching Uruk from Aratta and all three of the regions Magan, Meluhha and Dilmun are associated with copper, but the latter only as an emporium. Gudea refers obliquely to receiving copper from Dilmun: ‘He (Gudea) conferred with the divine Ninzaga (= Enzak of Dilmun), who transported copper like grain deliveries to the temple builder Gudea…’ (Cylinder A: XV, 11-18, Englund 1983, 88, n.6). Magan was certainly a land producing the metal, since it is occasionally referred to as the ‘mountain of copper’. It may also have been the source of finished bronze objects.”

 

Writing instruments/devices and pigments

 

240 copper tablets with inscriptions and scores of metal impements, tools, weapons inscribed with Harappa Script are evidence of metalwork and competence to write on metal. Many Harappa Script inscriptions are incised using a sharp stylus. Some inscriptions are hypertexts composed as raised script on metal. Some inscriptions on metal (for e.g. on a gold pendant) are written in some form of ink of ferric oxide or carbon black as pigment (perhaps using a writing brush). Some inscriptions are created with dotted orthography as on a gold fillet signifying the standard device which normally occurs in front of a one-horned young bull on many inscriptions. Hard metal styluses have been used to create over 240 copper plate Harappa Script inscriptions. Many copper inscriptions in bas-relief, raised script may have been used to created printed copies using ferric oxide ink. Evidence for writing in paint is provided by an inscription on a gold pendant and on pots with painted with Harappa Script hieroglyphs, for e.g. Susa pot with ‘fish’ hieroglyph and Nausharo pot showing a tied to a post.

Animals on Harappa Script are Meluhha metalwork hieroglyphic hypertexts, NOT totems

Animal pictographs in Harappa Script narratives are NOT totems. A totem is a symbol that serves as an emblem of a group of people, such as a family, clan, lineage, or tribe. The animal pictographs are NOT totems but hieroglyphs sacred symbols of kole.l ‘smithy’ which is kole.l ‘temple; of pasara ‘animals’ rebus: pasara ‘forge, smithy’.

meh ‘ram’ Rebus: meho ‘one who helps a merchant’  This is the explanation for the recurrence of a ram as a hieroglyph on hundreds of Dilmun, Persian Gulf seals.

Animals as hieroglyph signifiers is evident from these two examples. A ‘joined animal’ is created as a hypertext, composed of hieroglyph components: human face, horns of zebu, trunk of elephant, forefeet of a bovine, hindfeet of a feline, serpent-hood as upraised tail, scarves on neck.

सांगडणी (p. 495) sāṅgaḍaṇī f (Verbal of सांगडणें) Linking or joining together. सांगड (p. 495) sāṅgaḍa; f A body formed of two or more (fruits, animals, men) linked or joined together. सांगडणी (p. 495) sāṅgaḍaṇī f (Verbal of सांगडणें) Linking or joining together. That member of a turner’s apparatus by which the piece to be turned is confined and steadied. सांगड or canoe-float.

mũh ‘a face‘ rebus: mũh, muhã ‘ingot’ or muhã ‘quantity of metal produced at one time in a native smelting furnace’, ‘ingot’ (Santali)

karabhá m. ʻ camel ʼ MBh., ʻ young camel ʼ Pañcat., ʻ young elephant ʼ BhP. 2. kalabhá— ʻ young elephant or camel ʼ Pañcat.(CDIAL 2797) rebus: karba ‘iron’ ajirda karba ‘excellent iron’ (Tulu) ibha ‘elephant’ rebus: ib ‘iron’ ibbo ‘merchant’

kola ‘tiger’ कोलहा [ kōlhā ] कोलहे [kōlhēṃ] A jackal (Marathi) Rebus: kol, kolhe, ‘smelter’

pasra ‘animals’ rebus: pasra ‘smithy, forge’; hence, pasra meedpasāra meed = syn. of koe meed = forged iron (Santali.Mundari)

ā ‘zebu, sacred animal set at liberty’ rebus: ā ‘magnetite, ferrite ore’; cf. ā ‘animal festival held annually’.

 

xolā ‘tail’ of antelope and kulā ‘hood of snake‘ as tail. rebus:  kol, kolhe, ‘smelter’

Copper tablet m536. Hare +. Thorns. Seal impression m379 tiger + feeding trough.  kharā ‘hare‘ (Oriya)N. kharāyo ʻhare ʼ karA ‘crocodile’ rebus: khAr ‘blacksmith’

Both trough and tiger are hieroglyphs. It is inconceivable that tiger was a domesticated animal fed with a feeding trough. kola ‘tiger’ कोलहा [ kōlhā ] कोलहे [kōlhēṃ] A jackal (Marathi) Rebus: kol, kolhe, ‘smelter’  pattar ‘feeding trough‘ rebus: pattharika ‘merchant’ pattar ‘goldsmith guild’ Mohenjo-daro seal impression.  bicha ‘scorpion’ signifies bica ‘haematite, ferrite ore’

baradbarat ‘ox’ Rebus: bharata ‘alloy of pewter, copper, tin’

kuhāru = a monkey (Skt.lex.) Rebus: kuhāru ‘armourer or weapons maker'(metal-worker)

karabhá m. ʻ camel ʼ MBh., ʻ young camel ʼ Pañcat., ʻ young elephant ʼ BhP. 2. kalabhá— ʻ young elephant or camel ʼ Pañcat.(CDIAL 2797) rebus: karba ‘iron’ ajirda karba ‘excellent iron’ (Tulu) ibha ‘elephant’ rebus: ib ‘iron’ ibbo ‘merchant’

कर्णक káraka, kannā ‘legs spread‘, ‘rim of jar’, ‘pericarp of lotus’ karaī ‘scribe, supercargo’, kañi-āra ‘helmsman’. karadhāra m. ʻ helmsman ʼ Suśr. [kárṇa — , dhāra — 1]
Pa. kaṇṇadhāra — m. ʻ helmsman ʼ; Pk. kaṇṇahāra — m. ʻ helmsman, sailor ʼ; H. kanahār m. ʻ helmsman, fisherman ʼ.(CDIAL 2836)

mrēka, mēḻẖ goat‘ (Telugu. Brahui)  rebus: milakkhu, ‘copper’ (Pali) mleccha-mukha ‘copper’ (Samskrtam)

gaṇḍá m. ʻ rhinoceros ʼ lex., °aka — m. lex. 2. *ga- yaṇḍa — . [Prob. of same non — Aryan origin as khaḍgá — 1: cf. gaōtsāha — m. lex. as a Sanskritized form ← Mu. PMWS 138]
1. Pa. gaṇḍaka — m., Pk. gaṁḍaya — m., A. gãr, Or. gaṇḍā.
2. K. gö̃ m., S. geṇḍo m. (lw. with g — ), P. gaĩā m., °ī f., N. gaĩo, H. gaĩā m., G. gẽḍɔ m., °ī f., M. gẽā m. Addenda: gaṇḍa — 4. 2. *gayaṇḍa — : WPah.kṭg. geṇḍɔ mirg m. ʻ rhinoceros ʼ, Md. genā ← H. Rebus:  khāṇḍā ‘tools, pots and pans, implements’

No.642. Failaka cylinder seal.

karA ‘crocodile’ rebus: khAr ‘blacksmith’

gaṇḍá m. ʻ rhinoceros ʼ lex., °aka — m. lex. 2. *ga- yaṇḍa — . [Prob. of same non — Aryan origin as khaḍgá — 1: cf. gaōtsāha — m. lex. as a Sanskritized form ← Mu. PMWS 138]
1. Pa. gaṇḍaka — m., Pk. gaṁḍaya — m., A. gãr, Or. gaṇḍā.
2. K. gö̃ m., S. geṇḍo m. (lw. with g — ), P. gaĩā m., °ī f., N. gaĩo, H. gaĩā m., G. gẽḍɔ m., °ī f., M. gẽā m. Addenda: gaṇḍa — 4. 2. *gayaṇḍa — : WPah.kṭg. geṇḍɔ mirg m. ʻ rhinoceros ʼ, Md. genā ← H. Rebus:  khāṇḍā ‘tools, pots and pans, implements’

karabhá m. ʻ camel ʼ MBh., ʻ young camel ʼ Pañcat., ʻ young elephant ʼ BhP. 2. kalabhá— ʻ young elephant or camel ʼ Pañcat.(CDIAL 2797) rebus: karba ‘iron’ ajirda karba ‘excellent iron’ (Tulu) ibha ‘elephant’ rebus: ib ‘iron’ ibbo ‘merchant’

gaṇḍa four’ rebus: khāṇḍā ‘tools, pots and pans, implements’

ā ‘zebu, sacred animal set at liberty’ rebus: ā ‘magnetite, ferrite ore’; cf. ā ‘animal festival held annually’.

खोंड (p. 122khōṇḍa m A young bull, a bullcalf) one-horned young bull and karb ‘culm of millet’ (Punjabi), respectively. (NOTE: कोंद kōnda ‘engraver, lapidary setting or infixing gems’ is a phonetic variant of a worker with gold and lathe: kunda ‘fine gold, lathe.’ खोंड  [khōṇḍa] m A young bull, a bullcalf. (Marathi) खोंडा [khōṇḍā] m A कां बळा of which one end is formed into a cowl or hood; खोंडरूं (p. 216) [ khōṇḍarūṃ ] n A contemptuous form of खोंडा in the sense of कांबळा -cowl. (Marathi) khōṇḍa A tree of which the head and branches are broken off, a stock or stump Rebus: kõdār ‘turner’ (Bengali); kõdā ‘to turn in a lathe’ (Bengali). koiya ‘rings on neck‘, ko ‘horn’ rebus: ko ‘workshop’. కోడియ (p. 326iya కోడె (p. 326e  [Tel.] n. A bullcalf. kodeduda. A young bull (Telugu) (NOTE: the hieroglyph is a hypertext composed of young bull, one horn, pannier (a कां बळा ‘sack’ of which one end is formed into a cowl or hood), rings on neck.)

aya, ayo ‘fish’ aya ‘iron’ (Gujarati) ayas ‘metal alloy’ (Rigveda.Samskrtam)

खााडा [ khāṇḍā ] m A jag, notch, or indentation (as upon the implement’ rebus: khāṇḍā ‘tools, pots and pans, implements’

miṇḍ ‘ram’, miṇḍāl ‘markhor‘ (CDIAL 10310) Rebus:mẽht, meḍ ‘iron’ (Santali.Ho.Mu.)

pasara ‘domestic animals’ Rebus: pasara ‘smithy, forge’

rango ‘buffalo’ rebus: rango ‘pewter’  raga3 n. ʻ tin ʼ lex. [Cf. nāga — 2, vaṅga — 1]
Pk. raga — n. ʻ tin ʼ; P. ̄g f., ̄gā m. ʻ pewter, tin ʼ (← H.); Ku.  ʻ tin, solder ʼ, gng. ̄k; N. o ʻ tin, solder ʼ, A. B. ; Or. ga ʻ tin ʼ, gā ʻ solder, spelter ʼ, Bi. Mth. ̄gā, OAw. ga; H. ̄g f., ̄gā m. ʻ tin, pewter ʼ; Si. ran̆ga ʻ tin ʼ(CDIAL 10562)

ranku ‘antelope’ (Santali) kuragá1 m. ʻ antelope ʼ MBh., kulagá — MaitrS., kulugá — TS.
Pa. kuraga — , kuruga — m., Pk. kuraga — m., P. kurag m., OG. karagī f., G. kurãg m., °gī°gī f.; Si. kurun̆ga ʻ antelope ʼ, kiran̆gu ʻ the elk Rusa aristotelis ʼ.(CDIAL 3320) Rebus: ranku ‘tin’.

Dwaraka. Turbinella pyrum seal.

ranku ‘antelope’ (Santali) kuragá1 m. ʻ antelope ʼ MBh., kulagá — MaitrS., kulugá — TS.
Pa. kuraga — , kuruga — m., Pk. kuraga — m., P. kurag m., OG. karagī f., G. kurãg m., °gī°gī f.; Si. kurun̆ga ʻ antelope ʼ, kiran̆gu ʻ the elk Rusa aristotelis ʼ.(CDIAL 3320) Rebus: ranku ‘tin’.

baradbarat ‘ox’ Rebus: bharata ‘alloy of pewter, copper, tin’

खोंड (p. 122khōṇḍa m A young bull, a bullcalf) one-horned young bull and karb ‘culm of millet’ (Punjabi), respectively. (NOTE: कोंद kōnda ‘engraver, lapidary setting or infixing gems’ is a phonetic variant of a worker with gold and lathe: kunda ‘fine gold, lathe.’ खोंड  [khōṇḍa] m A young bull, a bullcalf. (Marathi) खोंडा [khōṇḍā] m A कां बळा of which one end is formed into a cowl or hood; खोंडरूं (p. 216) [ khōṇḍarūṃ ] n A contemptuous form of खोंडा in the sense of कांबळा -cowl. (Marathi) khōṇḍa A tree of which the head and branches are broken off, a stock or stump Rebus: kõdār ‘turner’ (Bengali); kõdā ‘to turn in a lathe’ (Bengali). koiya ‘rings on neck‘, ko ‘horn’ rebus: ko ‘workshop’. కోడియ (p. 326iya కోడె (p. 326e  [Tel.] n. A bullcalf. kodeduda. A young bull (Telugu) (NOTE: the hieroglyph is a hypertext composed of young bull, one horn, pannier (a कां बळा ‘sack’ of which one end is formed into a cowl or hood), rings on neck.)

See: https://wordpress.com/post/sarasvati97.wordpress.com/769

Harappa Seal

pasra meedpasāra meed = syn. of koe meed = forged iron, in contrast to dul meed, cast iron (Mundari) dul mẽht ‘cast iron’; mẽṛhẽt khaṇḍa ‘iron implements’ (Santali)  i meed rusty iron, also the iron of which weights are cast (Mundari. Santali)

bica ‘stone ore’ as in meedbica = iron stone ore, in contrast to bali-bica , iron sand ore (Mundari) sambr.o bica = gold ore (Mundarica)

mrēka, mēḻẖ goat‘ (Telugu. Brahui)  rebus: milakkhu, ‘copper’ (Pali) mleccha-mukha ‘copper’ (Samskrtam)

PIE *melH-i, *mel-iyo‑. mealie, miliary, milium, millet; gromwell, from Latin milium, millet.

aya, ayo ‘fish’ aya ‘iron’ (Gujarati) ayas ‘metal alloy’ (Rigveda.Samskrtam)

Section 6. Harappa Script Decipherment in the context of wealth creation, evidenced by Archaeometallurgy

“Benoit Mille has drawn attention to copper alloy ‘amulets’ discovered in the early Chalcolithic (late 5th millennium) levels of Mehrgarh in Baluchistan, Pakistan. He reported that metallographic examination established that the ornaments were cast by the lost-wax method (Mille, B., 2006, ‘On the origin of lost-wax casting and alloying in the Indo-Iranian world’, in Metallurgy and Civilisation: 6th international conference on the beginnings of the use of metals and alloys, University of Science and Technology, Beijing, BUMA VI). The amulets were made from copper alloyed with lead. Mehrgarh is well recognised as a centre for early pyrotechnologies. The wax models of the amulets would have been solid and may have had a simple core inserted. This is understandably the first stage in the technology. Mille also draws attention to the ‘Leopards weights’ from Baluchistan, dating to about 3000 BCE which were made using a complex core keyed into the investment mould.”(Davey, Christopher J., The early history of lost-wax casting, in: J. Mei and Th. Rehren, eds., Metallurgy and Civilisation: Eurasia and Beyond Archetype, London, 2009, ISBN 1234 5678 9 1011, pp. 147-154; p. 151).

 

Remarkable evidences of the excellence achieved in cire perdue metal castings are provided by bronze or copper alloy artifacts kept in the British Museum, said to have been acquired from Begram, and dated to ca. 2000 to 1500 BCE. These are also referred to as compartmented seals.

 

 

 

 

Six bronze stamps (a-b) circular with pin-wheel design recalling a svastika (c) square with heart-shaped pattern; broken lug on the back (d-f) broken with radiating spokes; one with broken lug.
Cast, copper alloy, circular, openwork seal or stamp, comprising five wide spokes with projecting rims, radiating from a circular hub also encircled by a flange. The outer rim is mostly missing and two spokes are broken. The back is flat, with the remains of a broken attachment loop in the centre.
2000BC-1500BC (circa) Copper alloy. Pierced. cast.
Made in: Afghanistan(Asia,Afghanistan)

Found/Acquired: Begram (Asia,Afghanistan,Kabul (province),Begram)

 

The earliest lost-wax cast object is by Bharatam Janam. Metallurgy explained — M. Thoury et al (March 2016). Harappa Script & Language explained.

Harappa (Indus) script hieroglyph: eraka ‘knave of wheel’ rebus: eraka ‘moltencast, metal infusion’; era ‘copper’. āra ‘spokes’ arā ‘brass’ erako molten cast (Tulu) Ka. ee to pour any liquids, cast (as metal); n. pouring; eṟacu, ercu to scoop, sprinkle, scatter, strew, sow; eaka, eraka any metal infusion; molten state, fusion.Tu. eraka molten, cast (as metal); eraguni to melt (DEDR 866)  agasāle, agasāli, agasālevāu <arka sAle= a goldsmith (Telugu) अर्क [p= 89,1]m. ( √ अर्च्) , Ved. a ray , flash of lightning RV. &cthe sun RV. &c Rebus: copper L.அருக்கம்¹ arukkam, n. < arka. (நாநார்த்த.) 1. Copper; செம்பு. 2. Crystal; பளிங்கு. அக்கம்&sup4; akkam

, n. < arka. An ancient coin = 1/12 காசு; ஒரு பழைய நாணயம். (S. I. I. ii. 123.)

అగసాలి (p. 23agasāli or అగసాలెవాడు agasāli. [Tel.] n. A goldsmith. కంసాలివాడు.

Kannada Glosses

erka = ekke (Tbh. of arka) aka (Tbh. of arka) copper (metal); crystal (Ka.lex.) cf. eruvai = copper (Tamil)

 

The cire perdue spoked wheel of copper+lead alloy was NOT an amulet, it was a metal artifact, a metal coin, akkam; it was a compartmental Harappa seal with Harappa (Indus) Script hieroglyph. May or may not have been used as a coin to value and exchange goods but a proclamation of the metallurgical excellence achieved by Bharatam Janam of 4th millennium BCE.

Artisans at work in Burma making Karen drum

 

Sun motif in the centre of the tympanum, Karen drum.

arká1 m. ʻ flash, ray, sun ʼ RV. [√arc] Pa. Pk. akka — m. ʻ sun ʼ, Mth. āk; Si. aka ʻ lightning ʼ, inscr. vid — äki ʻ lightning flash ʼ.(CDIAL 624) rebus: erako ‘moltencast’ arka, eraka ‘gold, copper’.

Detail of the tympanum of Karen drum.
ayo ‘fish’ rebus; aya ‘iron’ ayas ‘metal alloy’

Frog on the Karen bronze pancaloha ‘five metal alloys’ drum.

Kur. mūxā frog. Malt. múqe id. / Cf. Skt. mūkaka– id. (DEDR 5023) Rebus: mū̃h ‘ingot’ mũhe ‘ingot’ mũhã̄ = the quantity of iron produced at one time in a native furnace.

Elephant motif.  karba, ibha ‘elephant’ rebus: karba, ib ‘iron’.Ta. ayil iron. Ma. ayir, ayiram any ore. Ka. aduru native metal. Tu. ajirda karba very hard iron. (DEDR 192)                                                                                      “The town of Nwe Daung, 15 km south of Loikaw, capital of Kayah (formerly Karenni) State, is the only recorded casting site in Burma. Shan craftsmen made drums there for the Karens from approximately 1820 until the town burned in 1889.  Karen drums were cast by the lost wax technique; a characteristic that sets them apart from the other bronze drum types that were made with moulds. A five metal formula was used to create the alloy consisting of copper, tin, zinc, silver and gold. Most of the material in the drums is tin and copper with only traces of silver and gold. The Karen made several attempts in the first quarter of the twentieth century to revive the casting of drums but none were successful.”

 

In ancient Indian texts, such as Manasollasa, Silparatna, Manasara,the cire perdue technique is referred to as madhucchiṣṭa vidhānam.  मधु madhu -उच्छिष्टम्,-उत्थभ्,-उत्थितभ् 1 bees’-wax; शस्त्रासवमधूच्छिष्टं मधु लाक्षा च बर्हिषः Y.3.37; मधूच्छिष्टेन केचिच्च जध्नुरन्योन्यमुत्कटाः Rām.5.62.11.-2 the casting of an image in wax; Mānasāra; the name of 68th chapter. This technique was clearly attested in the Epic Rāmāyaa. मधुशिष्ट madhuśiṣṭa ‘wax’ (Monier-Williams, p. 780).

karaṇḍa ‘duck’ (Sanskrit) karaṛa ‘a very large aquatic bird’ (Sindhi) karaDa ‘safflower’ rebus:karaa ‘double-drum’ Rebus: करडा [ karaā ] Hard from alloy–iron, silver &c kharādī = turner (Gujarati)

कारण्डवः, पुं, स्त्री, (ञमन्ताडड इति रमेर्ड । रण्डः । ईषत् रण्डः । “ईषदर्थे” ६ । ७ । १०५ । इति कोः कादेशः । कारण्डं वाति । वा गतौ + “आतोनुपेति” । ३ । २ । ३ । कः । करण्डस्येदं कारण्डं तदाकारं वाति वा ।) हंसविशेषः इत्यमरः । २ । ५ । ३४ ॥ खडहाँस इति भाषा (यथा ऋतुसंहारे । शरद्वर्णणे ८ । “कारण्डवाननविघट्टितवीचिमालाः कादम्बसारसकुलाकुलतीरदेशाः” ॥)

https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/शब्दकल्पद्रुमः

कारण्डव पुंस्त्री रम–ड तस्य नेत्त्वम् रण्डः ईषत् रण्डः कारण्डः तं वाति वा–क करण्डस्येदं कारण्डं तदाकारं वाति वा–क वा । हंसभेदे “हंसकाण्डवोद्गीताः सारसाभिरुतास्तथा” भा० व० ३८ अ० । स्त्रियां जाति- त्वात् ङीष् । अस्य अजिरादि० पाष्ठात् मतौ संज्ञायामपि न दीर्घः कारण्डववती नदीविशेषः । “हससारसक्रौञ्च- चक्रवाककुररकादम्बकारण्डवेत्युपक्रमे” प्लवाः सधचारिणश्च” इति सुश्रुते तस्य प्लवत्वं स घचारित्वञ्चोक्तम् ।

https://sa.wikisource.org/wiki/वाचस्पत्यम्
kuhi ‘tree’ rebus kuhi ‘a furnace for smelting iron ore, to smelt iron’) tALa ‘palm trees’ rebus: DhALa ‘large ingot (oxhide)’

Hieroglyphs of Indus Script Cipher are sitnified on the Shahi Tump leopard weight which has been produced using the lost-wax casting method. The hieroglyphs are: 1. leopard; 2. ibex or antelope; 3. bees (flies). The rebus-metonymy readings in Meluhha are:

karaa  ‘panther’; karaḍa tiger (Pkt); खरडा [ kharaā ]  A leopard. खरड्या [ kharayā ] m or खरड्यावाघ m A leopard (Marathi). Kol. keiak  tiger. Nk.  khaeyak  panther.  Go. (A.) khayal tiger; (Haig) kariyāl panther Kui kāi, krāni tiger, leopard, hyena.  Kuwi (F.) kani tiger; (S.) klā‘ni tiger, leopard; (Su. P. Isr.) kaˀni (pl. ŋa) tiger. / Cf. Pkt. (DNM) karaa- id. (DEDR 1132).Rebus: करडा [karaāHard from alloy–iron, silver &c. (Marathi)  kharādī ‘ turner, a person who fashions or shapes objects on a lathe’ (Gujarati)

Hieroglyph: miṇḍāl ‘markhor’ (Tōrwālī) meho a ram, a sheep (Gujarati)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: mẽht, me ‘iron’ (Munda.Ho.) mr̤eka, melh ‘goat’ (Telugu. Brahui) Rebus: melukkha ‘milakkha, copper’. If the animal carried on the right hand of the Gudimallam hunter is an antelope, the possible readings are: ranku ‘antelope’ Rebus: ranku ‘tin’.

Ka. mēke she-goat; mē the bleating of sheep or goats.  Te. mē̃ka,  mēka goat. 

Kol. me·ke id. Nk. mēke id. Pa. mēva, (S.) mēya she-goat. Ga. (Oll.)mēge, (S.) mēge goat. Go. (M) mekā, (Ko.) mēka id. ? Kur. mēxnā (mīxyas) to call, call after loudly, hail. Malt. méqe to bleat. [Te. mr̤ēka (so correct) is of unknown meaning. Br. mēḻẖ is without etymology; see MBE 1980a.] / Cf. Skt. (lex.) meka– goat. (DEDR 5087). Meluhha, mleccha (Akkadian. Sanskrit). Milakkha, Milāca ‘hillman’ (Pali) milakkhu ‘dialect’ (Pali) mleccha ‘copper’ (Prakritam).

The bees are metaphors for wax used in the lost-wax casting method.

Hieroglyph: माक्षिक [p= 805,2] mfn. (fr. मक्षिका) coming from or belonging to a bee Rebus: ‘pyrites’: माक्षिक [p= 805,2] n. a kind of honey-like mineral substance or pyrites MBh. उपधातुः An inferior metal, semi-metal. They are seven; सप्तोपधातवःस्वर्णं माक्षिकं तारमाक्षिकम् । तुत्थं कांस्यं च रातिश्च सुन्दूरं च शिलाजतु ॥ उपरसः uparasḥउपरसः 1 A secondary mineral, (red chalk, bitumen, माक्षिक, शिलाजित &c).(Samskritam)

mákṣā f., mák — m. f. ʻ fly ʼ RV., mákikā — f. ʻ fly, bee ʼ RV., makika — m. Mn.Pa. makkhikā — f. ʻ fly ʼ, Pk. makkhiā — f., macchī — , °chiā — f.; Gy. hung. makh ʻ fly ʼ, wel. makhī f., gr. makí f., pol. mačin, germ. mačlin, pal. mắki ʻ mosquito ʼ,măkīˊla ʻ sandfly ʼ, măkīˊli ʻ house — fly ʼ; Ash. mačī˜ˊ ʻ bee ʼ; Paš.dar. mēček ʻ bee ʼ, weg. mečīˊk ʻ mosquito ʼ, ar. mučəkmučag ʻ fly ʼ; Mai. māc̣hī ʻ fly ʼ; Sh.gil.īˊ f., (Lor.) m*lc̣ī ʻ fly ʼ (→ Ḍ. m*lc̣hi f.), gur. măc̣hīˊ ʻ fly ʼ (ʻ bee ʼ in gur. măc̣hi̯kra, koh. măc̣hi — gŭn ʻ beehive ʼ); K. mȧchi f. ʻ fly, bee, dark spot ʼ; S. makha,makhi f. ʻ fly, bee, swarm of bees, sight of gun ʼ, makho m. ʻ a kind of large fly ʼ; L. (Ju.) makhī f. ʻ fly ʼ, khet. makkīˊ; P. makkh f. ʻ horsefly, gnat, any stinging fly ʼ, m. ʻ flies ʼ, makkhī f. ʻ fly ʼ; WPah.rudh. makkhī ʻ bee ʼ, jaun. mākwā ʻ fly ʼ; Ku. mākho ʻ fly ʼ, gng. ̄kh, N. mākho, A. mākhi, B. Or. māchi, Bi. māchī, Mth. māchī,̄chīmakhī (← H.?), Bhoj. māchī; OAw. mākhī, lakh. māchī ʻ fly ʼ, ma — mākhī ʻ bee ʼ (mádhu — ); H. māchīmākhīmakkhī f. ʻ fly ʼ, makkhā m. ʻ large fly, gadfly ʼ; G. mākhmākhī f. ʻ fly ʼ, mākhɔ m. ʻ large fly ʼ; M. mās f. ʻ swarm of flies ʼ, n. ʻ flies in general ʼ, māśī f. ʻ fly ʼ, Ko. māsumāśi; Si. balu — mäkka, st. — mäki — ʻ flea ʼ, mässa, st. mäsi — ʻ fly ʼ; Md. mehi ʻ fly ʼ.*makṣātara — , *mākṣa — , mākṣiká — ; *makṣākiraṇa — , *makṣācamara — , *makṣācālana — , *makṣikākula — ; *madhumakṣikā — .
Addenda: mákṣā — : S.kcch. makh f. ʻ fly ʼ; WPah.kṭg. mákkhɔkhɔ m. ʻ fly, large fly ʼ, mákkhi (kc. makhe) f. ʻ fly, bee ʼ, khi f., J. mākhī f.pl., Garh. mākhi. (CDIAL 9696) mākṣiká ʻ pertaining to a bee ʼ MārkP., n. ʻ honey ʼ Suśr. 2. *mākṣa — . [mákṣā — ]
1. WPah.bhad. māċhī ʻ bee ʼ, khaś. mākhī; — Pk. makkhia — , macchia — n. ʻ honey ʼ; Ash. mačimačík ʻ sweet, good ʼ, mačianá ʻ honey ʼ; Wg. mác̣imäc̣ ʻ honey ʼ, Kt. mac̣ī˜, Pr. maék, Shum. mac̣hī, Gaw. māc̣hī, Kal.rumb. Kho. mac̣hí, Bshk. mē̃c̣h, Phal. mn/ac̣hīmc̣hī, Sh. măc̣hīˊ f., S. L. mākhī f., WPah.bhiḍ. māċhī n., H.mākhī f.2. K. ̄ch, dat. °chas m. ʻ honey ʼ, WPah.bhal. māch n. — For form and meaning of Paš. māš ʻ honey ʼ see NTS ii 265, IIFL iii 3, 126.*mākṣakulika — , *mākṣikakara — , *mākṣikamadhu — .Addenda: mākṣika — : Kho. mac̣hi ʻ honey ʼ BKhoT 70.(CDIAL 9989)*mākṣikakara or *mākakara — ʻ bee ʼ. [Cf. madhu- kara — m. ŚārṅgP., °kāra — m. BhP., °kārī — f. R. <-> mākṣiká — , kará — 1]
Ash. mačarīk°čerīˊk ʻ bee ʼ, Wg. mac̣arīˊk, Kt. mačerík NTS ii 265, mac̣e° Rep1 59, Pr. mučeríkkeríkmukurīˊk, Shum. ̄c̣hāˊrik, Kal.rumb. mac̣hrik, Bshk.ˊēr, Phal. māc̣hurīˊ f.; Sh.koh. măc̣hāri f. ʻ bee ʼ, gil. (Lor.) m*lc̣hari ʻ bee, wasp, hornet ʼ (in latter meaning poss. < *makṣātara — ); P. makhīr m. ʻ bee ʼ, kgr. ʻ honey ʼ; — Gaw. ̄(h)oík with unexpl. —  — . (CDIAL 9990)  *mākṣikamadhu ʻ honey ʼ. [mākṣiká — , mádhu — ]
P. mākhyō̃ f., mākho m. ʻ honey, honeycomb ʼ.(CDIAL 9991) مچئِي mac̱ẖaʿī, s.f. (6th) A bee in general. Sing. and Pl. سره مچئِي saraʿh-mac̱ẖaʿī, s.f. (6th). Sing. and Pl.; or دنډاره ḏḏanḏḏāraʿh, s.f. (3rd) A hornet, a wasp. Pl. يْ ey. See ډنبره (Pashto) माक्षिक [p= 805,2] mfn. (fr. मक्षिका) coming from or belonging to a bee Ma1rkP. मक्षिकः makṣikḥ मक्षि makṣi (क्षी kṣī) का kāमक्षिकः मक्षि (क्षी) का A fly, bee; भो उपस्थितं नयनमधु संनिहिता मक्षिका च M.2.-Comp.-मलम् wax.  madhu

मधु a. -मक्षः, -क्षा, -मक्षिका a bee. (Samskritam) माक्षिक [p= 805,2] n. a kind of honey-like mineral substance or pyrites MBh. उपधातुः An inferior metal, semi-metal. They are seven; सप्तोपधातवः स्वर्णं माक्षिकं तारमाक्षिकम् । तुत्थं कांस्यं च रातिश्च सुन्दूरं च शिलाजतु ॥ उपरसः uparasḥउपरसः 1 A secondary mineral, (red chalk, bitumen, माक्षिक, शिलाजित &c).(Samskritam) மாக்கிகம் mākkikam, n. < mākika. 1. Bismuth pyrites; நிமிளை. (நாமதீப. 382.) 2. Honey; தேன். (நாமதீப. 410.) செம்புத்தீக்கல் cempu-t-tīkkal, n. < செம்பு +. Copper pyrites, sulphide of copper and iron; இரும்புஞ்செம்புங்கலந்த உலோகக்கட்டி. Loc.
Leopard weight. Shahi Tump. H.16.7cm; dia.13.5cm; base dia 6cm; handle on top.  Seashells inlays on frieze. The pair of leopard and ibex is shown twice, separated by stylized flies.

“The artefact was discovered in a grave, in the Kech valley, in eastern Balochistan. It belongs to the Shahi Tump – Makran civilisation (end of 4th millennium — beginning of 3rd millennium BCe). Ht. 200 mm. weight: 13.5 kg. The shell has been manufactured by lost-wax foundry of a copper alloy (12.6%b, 2.6%As), then it has been filled up through lead (99.5%) foundry. The shell is engraved with figures of leopards hunting wild goats, made of polished fragments of shellfishes. No identification of the artefact’s use has been given. (Scientific team: B. Mille, D. Bourgarit, R. Besenval, Musee Guimet, Paris).”
Source: https://www.academia.edu/8164498/Early_lost-wax_casting_in_Baluchistan_Pakistan_the_Leopards_Weight_from_Shahi Tump Leopard weight of Shahi Tump (Balochistan), National Museum, Karachi. The artefact was discovered in a grave, in the Kech valley, in Balochistan. ca. 4th millennium BCE. 200 mm. h. 13.5kg wt. The shell has been manufactured by lost-wax foundry of a copper alloy (12.6% Pb, 2.6% As), then it has been filled up through lead (99.5%) foundry. The shell is engraved with figures of leopards hunting wild goats, made of polished fragments of shellfishes. No identification of the artefact’s use has been given. (Scientific team: B. Mille, D. Bourgarit, R. Besenval, Musee Guimet, Paris.

Meluhha hieroglyphs:

karaa  ‘panther’ Rebus: karaa ‘hard alloy’. mlekh ‘goat’ Rebus: milakkhu ‘copper’ (Pali)

 

The pinnacle of achievement in Bronze Age Revolution relates to the invention of cire perdue technique of metal castings to produce metal alloy sculptures of breath-taking beauty. This achievement is exemplified by Nihal Mishmar artifacts dated to ca. 5th millennium BCE.

Mehergarh. 2.2 cm dia. 5 mm reference scale. Perhaps coppper alloyed with lead. [quote]Bourgarit and Mille (Bourgarit D., Mille B. 2007. Les premiers objets métalliques ont-ils été fabriqués par des métallurgistes ? L’actualité Chimique . Octobre-Novembre 2007 – n° 312-313:54-60) have  reported the finding (probably in the later still unreported excavation period) of small Chalcolithic “amulets” which they claim to have been produced by the process of Lost Wax. According to them, “The levels of the fifth millennium Chalcolithic at Mehrgarh have delivered a few amulets in shape of a minute wheel, while the technological study showed that they were made by a process of lost wax casting. The ring and the spokes were modelled in wax which was then coated by a refractory mould that was heated to remove the wax. Finally, the molten metal was cast in place of the wax. Metallographic examination confirmed that it was indeed an object obtained by casting (dendrite microstructure). This discovery is quite unique because it is the earliest attestation of this technique in the world.” They then, further on, state that “The development of this new technique of lost wax led to another invention, the development of alloys…Davey (Davey C. 2009.The Early History of Lost-Wax Casting, in J. Mei and Th. Rehren (eds), Metallurgy and Civilisation: Eurasia and Beyond Archetype, pp. 147-154. London: Archetype Publications Ltd.) relies only upon these Mehrgarh findings , as well as on the Nahal Mishmar hoard, to claim that Lost Wax casting began in the Chalcolithic period before 4000 BCE.” [unquote] Shlom Guil
Shahi Tump. Kech valley, Makran division, Baluchistan, Pakistan (After Fig. 1 in Thomas et al) Benoit Mille calls the bronze stamps of Shahi-Tump ‘amulets’ (made from copper alloyed with lead). Mehrgarh is well recognised as a centre for early pyrotechnologies.The wax models of the stamps would have   been solid and     may have had a simple core inserted.This is perhaps the first stage in the technology:”Small copper-base wheel-shaped “amulets” have been unearthed from the Early Chalcolithic levels at Mehrgarh in Balochistan (Pakistan), dating from the late fifth millennium B.C. Visual and metallographic examinations prove their production by a lost-wax process—the earliest evidence so far for this metalworking technique. Although a gap of more than 500 years exists between these ornaments from Mehrgarh and the later lost-wax casts known in the Indo-Iranian world, the technological and compositional links between these artefacts indicate a similar tradition. We already know that the lost-wax process was commonly used during the second half of the fourth millenium B.C, as exemplified by figurative pinheads and compartmented seals, the latter of which were produced and distributed across the region until the early second millennium B.C. Most, if not all, of these artefacts were made using the lost-wax technique. This intensive practice of lost-wax  casting certainly stimulated the technical development of the process, allowing the elaboration of more complex and heavier objects. The “Leopards Weight” (Balochistan, late fourth or early third millennium B.C.) is one of the best examples of these developments: the lost-wax copper jacket, with its opened hollow shape, constitutes an extraordinary technical achievement.(Mille, B., Bourgarit, D., and Besenval, R. 2005. ‘Metallurgical study of the ‘Leopards weight’ from Shahi-Tump (Pakistan)’, in C. Jarrige and V. Lefevre, eds., South Asian Archaeology 2001, Editions Recherches sur les Civilisations, Paris: 237-44) True hollow casting does not appear until the third millennium B.C., as illustrated by the manufacture of statuettes, including the Nausharo bull figurine (Balochistan, 2300–2100 B.C.), or those from BMAC sites in Central Asia (based upon analyses of items in the Louvre collections). The birth of the lost-wax casting process can also be paralleled with the first emergence of alloying in South Asia, as many of these early lost-wax cast artefacts were made of a copper-lead alloy (c. 10–40 wt% Pb and up to 4 wt% As). Significantly, it seems that the copper-lead alloy was solely dedicated to artefacts made using the lost-wax technique, a choice no doubt driven by the advantageous casting properties of such an alloy.” (Mille, Benoit, On the origin of lost-wax casting and alloying in the Indo-Iranian world, in: Lloyd Weeks, 2007, The 2007 Early Iranian metallurgy workshop at the University of Nottingham)

https://www.academia.edu/3858109/The_2007_workshop_on_early_Iranian_metallurgy_at_the_University_of_Nottingham
(Source: B. Mille, R. Besenval, D. Bourgarit, 2004, Early lost-wax casting in Balochistan (Pakistan); the ‘Leopards weight’ from Shahi-Tump. in: Persiens antike Pracht, Bergbau-Handwerk-Archaologie, T. Stollner, R Slotta, A Vatandoust, A. eds., pp. 274-280. Bochum: Deutsches Bergbau Museum, 2004.https://www.academia.edu/5689136/Reflections_Upon_Accepted_Dating_of_the_Prestige_Items_of_Nahal_Mishmar

Section 7. Conclusion & Executive Summary

Two unique discoveries resulted in a breakthrough to confirm the decipherment of Harappa Scrip Cipher as metalwork catalogues recorded in Meluhha language.

The discoveries are:

  1. Mohenjodaro three-sided tablet with Harappa Script inscription showing a boat loaded with ox-hide ingots
  2. Three pure tin ingots found with Harappa Script inscriptions from a shipwreck in Haifa.

 

m1429 Mohenjodaro prism tablet. A hieroglyph to signify bagalo ‘shipping vessel’ is bagala ‘Pleiades’. Such a hieroglyph showing 6 or 7 women as Pleiades is signified on three inscriptions of Harappa Script Corpora. bagalo = an Arabian merchant vessel (Gujarati) bagala = an Arab boat of a particular description (Ka.); bagalā (M.); bagarige, bagarage = a kind of vessel (Kannada) Rebus: bangala = kumpai = angāra śakaī = a chafing dish a portable stove a goldsmith’s portable furnace (Telugu) cf. bangaru bangaramu = gold  (Telugu) karaṇḍa ‘duck’ (Sanskrit) karaa ‘a very large aquatic bird’ (Sindhi) Rebus: करडा [karaā] Hard from alloy–iron, silver &c. (Marathi) A pair of palm trees flanking a pair of oxhide ingots. Hieroglyph: *tāa3 ʻ fan — palm ʼ, ī — 2 f. in ī — pua — ʻ palm — leaf ʼ Kād., tāla — 2 m. ʻ Borassus flabelliformis ʼ Rebus: hālako = a large metal ingot  (Gujarati) ढाळ (p. 204) Cast, mould, form (as of metal vessels, trinkets &c.) करण्ड  m. a sort of duck L. కారండవము (p. 274) [ kāraṇḍavamu kāraṇḍavamu. [Skt.] n. A sort of duck. (Telugu) Rebus: karaā ‘hard alloy’. Thus, the cargo is signified as hard alloy ingots.

kāru a wild crocodile or alligator (Telugu) ghariyal id. (Hindi) கராம் karām, n. prob. grāha. Rebus: kāru‘artisan’ (Marathi) kāruvu ‘artisan’ (Telugu) khār ‘blacksmith’ (Kashmiri) Hieroglyph fish = aya (Gujarati); crocodile = kāru (Telugu) Rebus: ayakāra ‘ironsmith’ (Pali)

Tin ingots in the Museum of Ancient Art of the Municipality of Haifa, Israel (left #8251, right #8252).

Three pure tin ingots each bear inscribed Harappa Script hieroglyphs; I have argued in a monograph in Journal of Indo-Judaic Studies, that the inscriptions were Meluhha hieroglyphs (Harappa Script writing)[19]. A third ingot was found inscribed with an added hieroglyph: moulded head, hieroglyph:  mũhe ‘face’ (Santali) Rebus: mũh ‘ingot’. Thus, the inscriptions on the tingots signify ranku dhatu mũh, ‘tin mineral ingot’.

 

These two discoveries PLUS the discovery of Susa pot containing metal implements confirm the function of Harappa Script to document trade transactions related to metalwork of Meluhha artisans. Significantly, they also point to the contributions made by Bharata seafaring merchants for transactions in tin trade to provide the important resource for the Tin-Bronze Revolution. The world’s major source of tin is the Mekong River delta of Ancient Far East. This has led to a hypothesis of a Maritime Tin Route from Hanoi to Haifa for further testing and researches.

 

Databases of Harappa Script[6] inscriptions (which may also be called: Dharma sajñā – Corporate badges of responsibility or Bharata hieroglyphs) narrate the cultural, socio-economic history of a civilization. It is called Harappa Script since the discovery of the first inscription on a seal (surface find) from Harappa in 1872 reported by Cunningham[7]. The number of Harappa script inscriptions total over 7000 (as of 2016). Select inscriptions with illustrations and details of decipherment are presented in a 799-page book: Harappa Script & Language[8]. This book is intended to be a basic resource for further historical researches on the Script and Meluhha language and to complement the Mythic Society’s multi-volume History and Culture of Bharata. Examples presented in this article are taken from this book.

 

Harappa Script Corpora: an overview

Seafaring Meluhha merchants used Harappa Writing in trade transactions; artisans created metal artifacts, lapidary artifacts of terracotta, ivory for trade. Glosses of the Proto-Indic or Harappa language are used to read rebus the Harappa script inscriptions.

The glyphs of the Harappa script or Harappa Writing include both pictorial motifs and signs. Both categories of glyphs are read rebus. As a first step in delineating the Harappa language, an Indian lexicon[9] provides a resource, compiled semantically in clusters of over 1240 groups of words/expressions from ancient Bharata languages as a Proto-Indic substrate dictionary.

Bitumen. Young woman spinning and servant holding a fan. Fragment of a relief known as “The spinner”. Bitumen mastic, Neo-Elamite period (8th century B.C.E–middle of the 6th century B.C.). Found in Susa. Height: 9 cm (3.5 in). Width: 13 cm (5.1 in).Louvre Museum. Excavated by Jacques de Morgan.

The legs of the platform and the seat are feline; the fish is ligatured with six blobs to signify the hieroglyphic nature of the orthographic, sculptural frieze composition.

What unites the bizarre components of the composition (for e.g.  spinner and fish on platform with feline legs) and a person with winnowing fan, is an example of rebus rendering, the mlecchita vikalpa, cryptography. Spinner (kātī) lady rebus khātī ‘wheelwright’; ayo ‘fish’ rebus: aya ‘iron’ ayas ‘alloy metal’ PLUS baTa ‘six’ rebus: bhaTa ‘furnace’ kola ‘tiger’ rebus: kol ‘working in iron, blacksmith’. kulā ʻwinnowing fan ʼ(Oriya) rebus: kol ‘working in iron’. 

Framework of data mining to decode inscriptions

Mahadevan concordance of about 2000 inscriptions excludes inscribed objects which do not contain ‘texts’; for example, this concordance excludes about 50 seals inscribed with the ‘svastikā’ pictorial motif and a pectoral which contains the pictorial motif of a one-horned bull with a device in front and an over-flowing pot. Parpola concordance has been used to present such objects which also contain valuable orthographic data which may assist in decoding the inscriptions. Many broken objects are also contained in Parpola concordance which are useful, in many cases, to count the number of objects with specific ‘field symbols’, a count which also provides some valuable clues to support the decoding of the messages conveyed by the ‘field symbols’ which dominate the object space.

In the process of normalizing the orthography of some glyphs to identify the core ‘signs’ of the script, some information is lost and at times, the process itself impedes the possibility of decoding the writing system. This can be demonstrated by (1) the ‘identification’ of a ‘squirrel’ glyph and (2) the failure to identify ‘dotted circle’ or ‘stars’ as glyphs.

It is, therefore, necessary to view the inscribed object as a composite message composed of glyphs: pictorial motifs and signs alike. Many scholars have noted the contacts between the Mesopotamian and Sarasvati Sindhu (Indus) Civilizations, in terms of cultural history, chronology, artefacts (beads, jewellery), pottery and seals found from archaeological sites in the two areas.

Section 8. Some select Critical comments on the decipherment by other leading experts.

Gregory Possehl has provided a bibliography of attempts at decipherment of Harappa Script.[10] This bibliography also includes reference to my preliminary attempts positing the possible economic context of the entire corpora of inscriptions. As research progressed and additional evidences could be collated from the civilizational contact areas of the Ancient Far East and Acient Near East, a new hypothesis has emerged, that of the Maritime Tin Route which linked Hanoi and Haifa, predating the Silk Road by two millennia. This is subject to further detailed researches and further excavations of all the sites of the civilization on the Vedic River Sarasvati Basin.

Historical researches by savants have led to the present state of knowledge which is poised for a paradigmatic shift in our understanding of the civilizational Pre-history. I invite a reference, in particular,to the 9th Maulana Azad Memorial Lecture delivered on November 11, 2016 by Prof. Shivaji Singh on the links between archaeology and the Veda to write afresh, the early history of Bharata. The full text of the lecture is at https://www.academia.edu/30071331/With_Veda_in_One_Hand_and_Spade_in_the_Other_Writing_Early_History_of_India_Afresh_–_Lecture_by_Prof._Shivaji_Singh

Prof. Shivaji Singh notes: “So clear and decisive is this Sarasvati evidence (rediscovery of the Lost River Sarasvati with majority of Harappan sites in its valley and other cultural and chronological facts that show that the Harappan Civilization should better be designated as Sarasvati Civilization) that many scholars, who earlier believed in Vedic-Harappan dichotomy and shared the view of Aryan arrival in India from outside, now, accept Vedic-Harappan identity. A noteworthy example of this shift in perception is presented by Prof. BB Lal who is an internationally recognized archaeologist and well-known for his extremely judicious approach. I name him particularly because as a former Director General, Archaeological Survey of India, he has been an eye witness and himself an active participant in harvesting much of that data and evidence we call the ‘Sarasvati evidence’…the Rigveda (3.53.14) refers to a people called KIkaTas and their leader Pramaganda. And, all the scholars including Griffith, the famous English translator of the text, agree that KIkaTas were a people of Magadha (South Bihar)…the episode of Videgha MAthava and his priest Gotama RAhugaNa reaching the banks of SadAnIrA (modern Gandak in Bihar) described in the Satapatha Brahmana (1.4.1.14-17)…Gotama RAhugaNa is a famous Rigvedic Rishi, a scion of AngIrA family, who has composed as many as twenty of the Rigveda (1.74-93). The Satapatha Brahmana itself informs that the event behing described belongs to a bygone age. Is there any room left to doubt that this journey from Sarasvati to SadAnIrA took place in the Rigvedic period itself?…Bharatas were the greatest champions of the Yajnya-based Vedic ideology…it is Kalibanga that was the capital of the Bharatas…Indianness or Bharatiyata cannot be defined in geographical and political terms. It can be articulated only culturally as a set of values based on intuitive recognition of transcendental spirituality…Bharatiyata or Indianness is distinguished by a unique spiritual vision of life which the Rigvedic Rishis have bequeathed to humanity.”

With such a resonant call to write the integrated history of Bharata using spiritual texts of the Veda and archaeological evidences, the over 8000 inscriptions of Harappa Script provide a textual framework to outline the urban progress in the sphere of metallurgy, as active participants in the Bronze Age Revolution.

I submit that the decipherment announced in this monograph is consistent with the vision of integrated History and Culture of Bharata framed on the Veda and Archaeology. This integration is dramatically validated by a discovery reported in April 2015 by the Students of Institute of Archaeology, New Delhi of a yajnakunda found in Binjor together with a Harappa Script Seal. The decipherment has shown that a Soma SamsthA Yaga was performed at Binjor. See: अष्टाश्रि यूप in yajna kunda Binjor (4MSR) archaeological evidence of Soma Yaga dated to ca. 2500 BCE. Significance of the discovery for Vedic and civilization studies http://tinyurl.com/zkwyh7s See also 744 monographs posted at https://independent.academia.edu/SriniKalyanaraman

I deem it a privilege that Prof. Shivaji Singh sought it fit to comment in a private communication: “I consider your work extremely important because you have broken the myth that Bharatiya tradition has downgraded the status of the artisans and placed them with the Shudras. In fact, it is this myth on which the entire structure of Subaltern history is based.”

I submit in all humility that if this monograph which outlines the framework of decipherment has contributed to a better understanding of the contributions made by Bharatam Janam to Bronze Age Revolution, it will be a precursor to the paradigm shift in early history of Bharata.

Principal reason for failures in past decipherment efforts

Received wisdom about Aryan Invasion as a ‘linguisticdoctrine’[11] is also a principal reason for the polemics of dubious decipherment claims. It is heartening no note that many linguists now recognize the nature of the Bharata sprachbund. A language X is also proposed to explain the nature of lexical, semantic structures with common features noticed in many ancient Bharata languages explained by sustained sustained cultural contacts among the people of Bhāratam.

Since Harappa Script is NOT syllabic, long texts of inscriptions are NOT necessary for decipherment. Now that over 7000 inscriptions are available, there is enough evidence to unravel the cipher of Harappa Script. Recognizing the metalwork catalogues of Harappa Script Corpora, the contributions of Bhāratam Janam to the Bronze Age Revolution and as intermeḍiaries along the Maritime Tin Route which preceded the Silk Road by 2 millennia, can be re-evaluated and the Bronze Age interaction maps can be re-drawn.

It is a leap of faith to rush to judgement that Harappa Script is NOT based on language because the length of inscriptions is very short (composed of upto 5 symbols). It has been demonstrated from the evolution of Egyptian hieroglyphs from ca. 32nd cent. BCE that short texts as inscriptions are read rebus. If each symbol or hieroglyph is logo-phonetic, words and combinations of words are identifiable on hypertexts created by Harappa Script.

Momentous, defining discovery of Vedic cultural foundations of Bharata

Discovery of Binjor Vedic fire-altar with an octagonal Yūpa and a seal inscribed with Harapp Script by students of Institute of Archaeology of India Museum in 2015 is momentous. It conclusively establishes the Vedic culture continuum in Vedic River Sarasvati Basin because the octagonal Yūpa is a signature tune of a Soma Yaga Samstha. The seal of Binjor is a metalwork catalogue. Octagonal shape is the rudra bhāga of linga metaphored as Pillar of light and fire. cf. skambha sukta Atharvaveda (AV X.7,8).

A remarkable archaeological evidence validates the Vedic culture and provides an indication of the spoken language of the people who invented and used Harappa Script. The evidence is from Binjor (near Anupgarh) in an archaeological site called 4MSR. At this site, agni kunda with aṣṭāśri Yūpa was found evidencing the performance of a Soma Yaga. Vajapeya is one of 7 samstha (profession) for processing/smelting soma (a mineral, NOT a herbal): सोमः [सू-मन् Uṇ.1.139]-संस्था a form of the Soma-sacrifice; (these are seven:- अग्निष्टोम, अत्यग्निष्टोम, उक्थ, षोढशी, अतिरात्र, आप्तोर्याम and वाजपेय). The Vajapeya performeḍ in Binjor and Kalibangan should have been related to the Soma-samstha: सोमः संस्था specified as वाजपेय with the shape of the Yūpa with eight- or four-angles. For every Soma Yaga such a Yūpa is installed. 19 such Yūpas have been found in Rajasthan, Allahabad, Mathura and East Borneo.[12] At the Vājapeya, the yūpa is eight-angled (as in Binjor), corresponding to the eight quarters (Sat.Br. V.2.1.5 aṣṭāśrir yūpo bhavati) अश्रि [p= 114,2] f. the sharp side of anything , corner , angle (of a room or house) , edge (of a sword) S3Br. Ka1tyS3r. often ifc. e.g. अष्टा*श्रि , त्रिर्-/अश्रि , च्/अतुर्-श्रि , शता*श्रि q.v. (cf. अश्र) ;([cf. Lat. acies , acer ; Lith. assmu3]). “The first Yūpa inscription of Mulavarman (in East Borneo) was erected to commemorate a bahu-suvarnaka sacrifice,’that on which gold is spent (used?) in profusion’.”[13]  I suggest that bahu-suvarnaka refers to the many wealth-giving metals worked in a Soma Yaga.

Binjor. The fire altar, with a yasti made of an octagonal brick. Photo: Subhash Chandel, ASI

Binjor seal

Binjor (4MSR) Seal Inscription, decipherment

Fish + scales, aya ã̄s (amśu) ‘metallic stalks of stone ore’. Vikalpa: badho ‘a species of fish with many bones’ (Santali) Rebus: bahoe ‘a carpenter, worker in wood’; badhoria ‘expert in working in wood’(Santali) khambhaā ‘fish fin‘ rebus: kammaTa ‘mint, coiner, coinage’

gaṇḍa ‘four’ Rebus: khaṇḍa ‘metal implements.  Together with cognate ancu ‘iron’ the message is: native metal implements mint

Thus, the hieroglyph multiplex reads: aya ancu khaṇḍa kammaa ‘metallic iron alloy implements, mint, coiner, coinage’.

koi ‘flag’ (Ta.)(DEDR 2049). Rebus 1: ko ‘workshop’ (Kuwi) Rebus 2: khŏ m. ‘pit’, khö̆ü f. ‘small pit’ (Kashmiri. CDIAL 3947)

The bird hieroglyph: karaकरण्ड  m. a sort of duck L. కారండవము (p. 274) [ kāraṇḍavamu ] Rebus: karaā ‘hard alloy’

Thus, the text of Harappa Script inscription on the Binjor Seal reads: ‘metallic iron alloy implements mint, hard alloy workshop’ PLUS the hieroglyphs of one-horned young bull PLUS standard device in front read rebus:

kõda ‘young bull, bull-calf’ rebus: kõdā ‘to turn in a lathe’; kōnda ‘engraver, lapidary’; kundār ‘turner’.

Hieroglyph: sãghāɔ ‘lathe’ (Gujarati) Rebus: sangara ‘proclamation. सं-ग्रह  sagraha, samgaha  ‘a guardian , ruler , manager , arranger’ R. BhP.

Together, the message of the Binjor Seal with inscribed text is a proclamation, ‘a metalwork catalogue (of) manager, turner of metallic iron alloy implements, hard alloy workshop’

Harappa Script hieroglyphs on priest statue of Mohenjo-daro signify dhā̆va ‘iron-smelter’, potr̥, पोतृpurifier’

The ‘purifier’ is also a dhā̆va ‘iron-smelter’. Metallurgical smelting process is a process of purification. Purification of minerals is achieved through smelting in fire.

 

The hieroglyph signifiers are related to some etyma of Bharata sprachbund in this addendum. vaa– string, rope, tie (Samskrtam) is signified by the string which ties the ‘dotted circle’ on the forehead and right-shoulder of the Priest. The rebus reading is: –va వటగ ‘clever, skilful’ (Telugu).

 

Hieroglyph: string, wisp: S. dhāī f. ʻ wisp of fibres added from time to time to a rope that is being twisted ʼ, L. dhāī˜ f. Rebus: dhāu ʻ ore (esp. of copper) ʼ; Or. hāu ʻ red chalk, red ochre ʼ (whence hāuā ʻ reddish ʼ; dhāˊtu n. ʻ substance ʼ RV., m. ʻ element ʼ MBh., ʻ metal, mineral, ore (esp. of a red colour) ʼ Mn., ʻ ashes of the dead ʼ lex., ʻ *strand of rope ʼ (cf.tridhāˊtu — ʻ threefold ʼ RV., ayugdhātu — ʻ having an uneven number of strands ʼ KātyŚr.). [√dhā]

 

Thus, the ‘dotted circle’ dhāī˜ PLUS vaa ‘string’ is read: dhā̆va ‘smelter’.

The uttarīyam˜ worn by the Priest is potta — , °taga — , °tia — n. ʻ cotton cloth ʼ (Prakrtam) potti ‘cloth’ (Kannada) Rebus: Potr̥, पोतृ ‘purifier’ Priest (Rigveda). போத்தி pōttin. < போற்றி. 1. Grandfather; பாட்டன். Tinn. 2. Brahman temple- priest in Malabar;

மலையாளத்திலுள்ள கோயிலருச் சகன். पोतदार (p. 303) pōtadāra m ( P) An officer under the native governments. His business was to assay all money paid into the treasury. He was also the village-silversmith. (Marathi)

 

The fillet worn on the forehead and on the right-shoulder signifies one strand; while the trefoil on the shawl signifies three-strands.

 

Single strand (one dotted-circle)

 

Two strands (pair of dotted-circles)

 

Three strands (three dotted-circles as a trefoil)
These orthographic variants provide semantic elucidations for a single: dhātu, dhāū, dhāv ‘red stone mineral’ or two minerals: dul PLUS dhātu, dhāū, dhāv ‘cast minerals’ or tri- dhātu,      -dhāū, -dhāv ‘three minerals’ to create metal alloys’. The artisans producing alloys are dhā̆va m. ʻa caste of iron — smeltersʼ, dhāvī ʻcomposed of or relating to ironʼ) (CDIAL 6773).

dām ‘rope, string’ rebus: dhāu ‘ore’ rebus: मेढा [hā] A twist or tangle arising in thread or cord, a curl or snarl (Marathi). Rebus: me ‘iron, copper’ (Munda. Slavic) mẽhtme ‘iron’ (Munda).

 

Semantics of single strand of rope and three strands of rope are: 1. Sindhi dhāī f. ʻ wisp of fibres added from time to time to a rope that is being twisted ʼ, Lahnda dhāī˜ id.; 2. tridhāˊtu — ʻ threefold ʼ (RigVeda)

 

Evolution ha-, dha- in Brahmi script syllables are evocative of ‘string’ and ‘circle, dotted circle’ as may be seen from the following orthographic evidence of epigraphs dated from ca. 300 BCE:
It may be seen from the table of evoution of Brahmi script orthography that

  1. a circle signified the Brahmi syllable ‘ha-‘ and a dotted circlesignified the syllable ‘tha-‘;

 

  1. a string with a twist signified the syllable ‘da-‘, a string ending in a circled twist signified the syllable ‘ha-‘ and a stepped string signified the syllable ‘a-‘.

 

Dance-step of the dancing girl and wick of lamp of Mohenjo-daro

Lost-wax casting. Bronze statue, Mohenjo-daro. Bronze statue of a woman holding a small bowl, Mohenjo-daro; copper alloy made using cire perdue method (DK 12728; Mackay 1938: 274, Pl. LXXIII, 9-11)

Both women in the cire perdue (lost-wax) cast bronze sculptures, seem to hold a lamp (bowl) wick in a hand.  karã̄ n. pl. ʻ wristlets, bangles ʼ (Gujarati) Rebus: khār ‘blacksmith’. ʻcupʼ i ‘wick’ rebus: bhaṭṭī ‘furnace, forge’ kola ‘woman’ rebus: kol ‘working in iron’ One is shown with a dance-step: medance step’ rebus: me ‘iron’. Thus, iron furnace blacksmith. loh ‘copper, iron, metal’ PLUS bhaṭṭī ‘furnace, forge’ bhāi ʻ kiln ʼ bhahī, bhaṭṭī ʻ bhā ʻ kiln ʼ; H. bhaṭṭ m. ʻ kilnʼ, bha f. ʻkiln’.

That dance-step is hieroglyph is evident from the inscription on a potsherd, Bhirrana. Hieroglyph: me sole of foot, footstep, footprint (Ko.); meṭṭu step, stair, treading, slipper (Te.)(DEDR 1557).  Rebus: me ‘iron’(Munda.Ho.); मेढ meh‘merchant’s helper’(Pkt.)  meed-bica = iron stone ore, in contrast to bali-bica, iron sand ore (Munda)

Des’īnāmamālā Glossary, p. 71 Desinamamala of Hemacandra ed. R. Pischel (1938)

Thus, the two cire perdue statues of women and the hieroglyph on Bhirrana potsherd signify: metal furnace turner, merchant.

These are clear, unambiguous evidences of the spoken language (Mleccha or Proto-Prakritam of Bharata sprachbund) which is a continuum of the Vedic culture exemplified by chandas of 10,800 Rigveda rica-s. Complementing the rica-s are the Harappa Script Corpora with over 7000 inscriptions. Both resources are veritable data mines for further historical researches in Vedic culture continuum in Bharata, economic history with particular reference to Bharata’s archaeo-metallurgy contributions to Bronze Age Revolution and formation/evolution of Bharata languages. One hypertext comes closest to a metaphor in Vedic cultural tradition. It is in the depiction of three faces on a horned person seated in penance (Seal m0304). Vedic metaphor is related to Vis’vakarma, Tvasta. He may signify Triśiras, son of Tvaţā, कुबेर. Such a parallel interpretation is consistent with 1) decipherment of hieroglyphs on the seal m0304, 2) the Germanic tradition of Tuisto, Father of Germanic people, 3) tatara ‘smelter’ (Japanese), 4) haherā ‘brassworker’ (Sindhi), 5) kamaha ‘penance’ Rebus: kammaa ‘mint, coiner, coinage’.

Are the torcs on Karnonou (Cernunnos) corporate badges (bracelets) of dharma samjnA? If so, karã̄ n. pl. ʻ wristlets, bangles ʼ (Gujarati) Rebus: khār ‘blacksmith’

Triśiras ‘three heads’ of person seated in penance Seal m0304.

Germanic people are divided into three large branches, the Ingaevones, the Herminones and the Istaevones. Their ancestry is derived from three sons of Mannus, son of Tuisto, their common forefather.  (Publius Cornelius Tacitus, Germania, 98 CE). Tuisto is equated to the Vedic Tvaṣṭṛ.[14] It is possible that the three branches of people associated with Tuisto may explain the metaphor of three heads, triśiras remembered from Rigvedic tradition: त्रि–शिरस् [p= 460,3] mfn. three-headed (त्वाष्ट्र, author of RV.x,8) Ta1n2d2yaBr. xvii

Br2ih. KaushUp. MBh. Ka1m. (ज्वर) BhP. x , 63 , 22 कुबेर L (Monier-Williams).

The kāraī or kāraīka, ‘helmsman’ signified on Seal m0304 may also relate to karnonou (Cernunnos) on the Pillar of Boatmen of 1st cent., CE.

Another possibility is that the three heads signified on seal m0304 may relate to Kubera ~Triśiras,son of Tvaţā of Rigveda. One meaning of tvāṣṭra त्वाष्ट्र is ‘copper’. mũhe ‘face’ (Santali) Rebus: mũh ‘ingot’ PLUS kolmo ‘three’ rebus: kolimi ‘smihy, forge’. Thus, the orthography of ‘three faces’ may signify pewter, bronze, brass. (three alloys of copper formed by adding zinc and tin in varying proportions). Hence, the rebus reding to signify coppersmith, brass worker, bronze worker: *haṭṭhakāra ʻ brass worker ʼ. 2. *haṭṭhakara — . [*haṭṭha — 1, kāra — 1]1. Pk. haṭṭhāra — m., K. hö̃hur m., S. ̄hāro m., P. hahiār, °rā m.2. P. ludh. haherā m., Ku. hahero m., N. haero, Bi. haherā, Mth. haheri, H. haherā m.(CDIAL 5493)

Bharata artisanal competence in metals technologies is exemplified by Wootz (ukku) steel sword presented by Purushottama (Porus) to Alexander on the banks of Jhelum river and Delhi (Besnagar) or Kodachadri non-rusting iron pillars.

A painting in Steel Authority of India Institute, Ranchi.

Kodachadri temple, Karnataka and iron pillar. Culturally, smithy/forge was the temple of Ancient Bharata. kole.l ‘smithy, forge’ was also kole.l ‘temple’ a rebus expression repeatedly signified on Harappa Script Corpora points to the roots of weltanschauung of adhyatmika traditions of Bharata from ca. 8th millennium BCE. A priest of this ancient temple was shown on an exquisite statue of Mohenjo-daro with Harappa Script hieroglyphs (ca. 3rd millennium BCE) to signify that he is smelter and purifier (of smelted minerals). A dance-step and a woman with a wick-lamp signified on bronze statues are exemplars of the Bronze Age Revolution which impacted Bharatam Janam, ‘metalcaster folk’, an expression used by Viśvamitra in Rigveda (RV 3.53.12).

Significance of Harappa Script decipherment to explain the wealth of Bharatam ca 1 CE

It is a fact of great historical significance that Bharata accounted for 32.9% of World GDP in 1 CE.[15]

At the turn of the Common Era, Bharata was indeed a land of bahu-suvarnaka, riches of gold and metallurgical excellence as evidenced by the decipherment of Harappa Script.

This cultural continuity foundation built over millennia sets the tone and tenor for the History and Culture of Bharata.

  1. Kalyanaraman

Sarasvati Research Center December 9, 2016

 

 

 

Bibliography

A number of concordances and sign lists have been compiled, by many scholars, for the ‘Indus’ script:

Dani, A.H., Indian Palaeography, 1963, Pls. I-II

Gadd and Smith, Mohenjodaro and the Indus Civilization, London,1931,vol. III, Pls. CXIX-CXXIX

Hunter, G.R., JRAS, 1932, pp. 491-503

Hunter, G.R., Scripts of Harappa and Mohenjodaro, 1934, pp. 203-10

Langdon, in: John Marshall, Mohenjodaro and the Indus Civilization, London, 1931, vol. II, pp. 434-55

Koskenniemi, Kimmo and Asko Parpola, Corpus of texts in the Indus script, Helsinki, 1979; A concordance to the texts in the Indus script, Helsinki, 1982

Mahadevan, I., The Indus Script: Texts, concordance and tables, Delhi, 1977, pp. 32-35

Parpola et al., Materials for the study of the Indus script, I: A concordance to the Indus Inscriptions, 1973, pp. xxii-xxvi

Vats, Excavations at Harappa, Calcutta, 1940, vol. II, Pls. CV-CXVI

Amiet, P., Age of inter-Iranian Trade, Paris: Meeting of National Museums, 1986, p.125-126; Fig. 96, 1-9, (Notes and documents of the Museums of France).

Amiet, P., Susa 6000 years of history, Paris: Meeting of National Museums, 1988, p.64-65; Fig. 26.

Benoit, A., The Civilizations of the former Prochre East Paris: Ecole du Louvre, 2003, p.252-253; Fig. 109 (Manuals Ecole du Louvre, Art and Archaeology).

Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions, 1. Collections in India, Helsinki, 1987 (eds. Jagat Pati Joshi and Asko Parpola)

Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions, 2. Collections in Pakistan, Helsinki, 1991 (eds. Sayid Ghulam Mustafa Shah and Asko Parpola)

Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions 3.1 supplement to Mohenjoo-daro and
Harappa, Helsinki, Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia Paropola, Asko, BM Pande and Petteri Koskikallio, 2010.

Kalyanaraman, S., 1988, Harappa Script: A bibliography, Manila.

Kalyanaraman, S, 1995, SarasvatiSindhu civilization: evidence from the veda, archaeology, geology and satellite, 10th Wold Sanskrit Conference, Bangalore.

Kalyanaraman S. 1997, A project to revive the Sarasvati river: Role of GIS,  National Seminar on Geographic Information Systems for Development Planning, Chennai, 10-12 January, 1997, Renganathan Centre for Information Studies

Kalyanaraman S, 1999, SarasvatiRiver, Godess and Civilization, in: Memoir 42, Vedic Sarasvati, Geological Survey of India, Bangalore, pp. 25-29.

Kalyanaraman, S, 2000, River Sarasvati: Legend, Myth and Reality, All India Sarasvat Association, Mumbai

Kalyanaraman S., 2001, Sarasvati, Babasaheb Apte Smarak Samiti, Bangalore (1100 pages, 600 illustrations); part of 6 vol. Encyclopaedia on Sarasvati (Other 5 vols. in press).

Kalyanaraman, S., 2003, National River Network, An overview, Bangalore, Rashtrotthana Research and Communication Centre

Kalyanaraman S, 2004, Indian Alchemy: Soma in the Veda, Munshiram Manoharlal, Delhi

Kalyanaraman S., 2004, Sarasvati (an encyclopaedic work in 7 volumes: Civilization, River, Bharati, Technology, Epigraphs, Language), Bangalore, Babasaheb Apte Smarak Samiti, Bangalore

Kalyanaraman S., 2007, Rama Setu, Chennai, Rameswaram Ramsetu Protection Movement

Kalyanaraman S., 2008, Harappa Script encodes mleccha speech (5 vols.: Language, Writing, Epigraphica Sarasvati, Dictionary, Indian Lexicon), Chennai, Jayalakshmi Book Stores, 6 Apparsami Koil St., Mylapore, Chennai 600004

Kalyanaraman, S., 2010, Harappa Script Cipher: Hieroglyphs of Indian Linguistic Area, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2011, Rastram – Hindu history in United Indian Ocean States, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2012, Indian Hieroglyphs – Invention of Writing, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2013 Indus writing in Ancient Near East – Corpora and a Dictionary, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2011, Rastram – Hindu history in United Indian Ocean States, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2012, Indian Hieroglyphs – Invention of Writing, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2013 Indus writing in Ancient Near East – Corpora and a Dictionary, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2014, Sagan finds Saravati (Novel), Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2014, A theory for Wealth of nationa, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2014, Indian Ocean Community, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2014, Harosheth Hagoyim, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2015, Outrage for Dharma, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2015, Akkadian Rising sun (Novel) , Amazon

Kalyanaraman, S., 2015, Harappa Script Deciphered, Amazon.
Kalyanaraman, S., 2015, Philosophy of Symbolic Forms in Meluhha, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2015, Meluhha, a Visible language, Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2015, Meluhha, tree of life (Novel), Amazon.

Kalyanaraman, S., 2016, Harappa Scrip & Language — Data mining of Corpora, tantra yukti & knowledge discovery of a civilization

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hinducivilization

Kalyanaraman, S., 2016, 642 monographs/papers at https://independent.academia.edu/SriniKalyanaraman

Mahadevan, I., 1986, A Computer Study of the Harappa Script by I. Mahadevan, International Association of Tamil Research. Madras. (Residence: Vyjayanthi. 112. Chamit!’s Road. Nandanam. Madras 600035. Indio)in: Current Science, January 20, 1986, Vol.55, No.2, pp. 77-79.

Pande, BM, ‘Inscribed copper tablets from Mohenjo-daro: a preliminary analysiś in: D. Agrawal/A. Ghosh eds., Radiocarbon and Indian Arcaheology, Bombay 1973, tablet no. 38.

Pande, B. M. 1979 Inscribed Copper Tablets from Mohenjo daro: A Preliminary Analysis. In Ancient Cities of the Indus, edited by G. L. Possehl, pp. 268-288. New Delhi, Vikas Publishing House PVT LTD.

Pande, B. M. 1991 Inscribed Copper Tablets from Mohenjo-daro: Some Observations.Puratattva (21): 25-28.

Parpola, A. 1992 Copper Tablets from Mohenjo-daro and the study of the Harappa Script. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Moenjodaro, edited by I. M. Nadiem, pp. Karachi, Department of Archaeology.

Asko Parpola, 2008, Copper tablets from Mohenjo-daro and the study of the Harappa Script, pp. 132-139 in: Eri Olijdam & Richard H Spoor (eds.), Intercultural relations between south and southwest Asia: Studies in commemoration of ECL During Caspers (1234-1996). BAR Interntional Series 1826. Oxford: Archaeopress.

Shinde, V. & Willis, R.J., (2014). A New Type of Inscribed Copper Plate from Indus Valley (Harappa) Civilisation. Ancient Asia. 5, p.Art. 1. http://www.ancient-asia-journal.com/articles/10.5334/aa.12317/ The paper analyzes a group of nine Indus Valley copper plates (c. 2600–2000 BC), discovered from private collections in Pakistan

Yule, Paul, 1988, A new copper tablet from Mohenjo-daro (DK 11307), in: M. Jansen and G. Urban (eds.), Reports on field work carried out at Mohenjo-daro, Interim Reports, Vol.2,Pakistan 1983-84, German Research Project Mohenjo-daro RWTH Aachen, Istituto Italiano per ilmeḍio ed estremo oriente, Roma https://www.academia.edu/737300/A_New_Copper_Tablet_from_Mohenjo-daro_DK_11307_ Paul Yule analyses the stratigraphic and archaeological context of this find.

 

                                              

[1] http://arabian-archaeology.com/images/ic-007.jpg

[2] George Coedes, Histoire ancienne des Etats hindouises d’Extreme-Orient,1944 (Ancient History of the Hinduised States of Ancient Far East)

[3] Dennys Frenez and Massimo Vidale, 2012, Harappa Chimaeras as ‘Symbolic Hypertexts’. Some Thoughts on Plato, Chimaera and the Indus Civilization  

http://a.harappa.com/content/harappan-chimaeras 

[4] http://huntingtonarchive.osu.edu/Makara%20Site/makara

[5] Three Gold pendants: Jewelry Marshall 1931: 521, pl. CLI, B3

[6] Also called Indus Script. Decipherment demonstrates that an apt expression will be Bharata Hieroglyphs.

[7] The total number of Harappa script inscriptions now total over 7,000.

[8] S. Kalyanaraman, 2016, Harappa Script & Language, Amazon

[9] Indian Lexicon – a comparative dictionary of 25+ languages of Bharata

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ykm93xf4unhordu/IndianLexicon.pdf?dl=0

[10] Possehl, Gregory L. (1996). Indus Age: The Writing System. University of Pennsylvania Press.

[11] A phrase used by linguist MB Emeneau

[12] http://tinyurl.com/zdqqnds

 

[13]  Robert S. Wicks, 1992, Money, markets and trade in early Southeast Asia: the development of indigenous monetary systems to AD 1400, SEAP Publications, Cornell, Ithaca, NY, p.245; loc. Cit. Mulavarman’s First Yūpa Inscription; FH van Naerssen, and RC longh, The economic and administrative history of early Indonesia, Leiden: Brill, 1977), p. 20; J. Ph. Vogel, ‘The Yūpa inscription of Mulavarman from Koelei (East Borneo)’, Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land-en Volkenkunde 79, 1918: 213; Mulavarman’s Second Yūpa Inscription, Vogel, ‘Yūpa Inscriptionś, p. 214; Mulavarman’s Third Yūpa Inscription; Vogel, ‘Yūpa Inscriptions’, p. 215.

[14] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuisto

[15] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_largest_historical_GDP Pace Angus Maddison’s work for OECD.

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s