Copper anthropomorphs are dharma saṃjñā, संज्ञा (Samskrtam), dhamma sañña, सञ्ञा ‎(Pali) ‘responsibility badges’ in Bhārata Rāṣṭram

Copper anthropomorphs are dharma saṃjñā, संज्ञा (Samskrtam), dhamma sañña, सञ्ञा ‎(Pali) ‘responsibility badges’ in Bhārata Rāṣṭram 

–Of helmsman-metals-artificer श्रेणि guild in Harappa Script Bronze Age revolution who contributed to the nation’s wealth

http://tinyurl.com/jukgebp

In Harappa (Indus) Script Corpora of data archives of Tin-Bronze Age Revolution, 46 copper anthropomorphs are evidenced from copper hoard culture sites of Bharata, Lothal, Haryana, Bihar, Sheorajpur (Uttar Pradesh), Madarpur (Uttar Pradesh) and Oman. Sheorajpur also has evidence of a Shiva temple with a metal roof, an archaeological heritage monument on the banks of River Ganga.

Could this be the work of dhokra kamar? this is an amazing structure by any standards as a ceiling of a S’iva temple called Kereshwar in Shivrajpur, a village on the banks of Ganga.

Executive Summary

http://tinyurl.com/jfhcb63 All four types of anthropomorphs of Copper Hoard Culture are dharma saṁjñā ‘metalwork signifiers of responsibilities in guild or professional calling cards’

Most anthropomorphs are shown of a person standing with spread legs. Some are in sitting posture. Anthropomorphs may be categorized in four types and all are Harappa script hypertexts:

  1. Ram with curved horns (without any other text or hieroglyph), in standing or sitting posture (Steersman, helmsman)
  2. Ram with curved horns PLUS fish hieroglyph (Steersman, helmsman PLUS metal worker)  अयोगवअयोगू  xxx , 5 ‘carpenter’
  3. Ram with curved horns with one arm lifted up (Steersman, helmsman PLUS erako ‘moltencast copper’, i.e. cire perdue metal artificer.
  4. Ram with curved horns PLUS ‘one-horned young bull’ PLUS ‘boar’ PLUS text message (Steersman, helmsman PLUS supercargo — a representative of the ship’s owner on board a merchant ship, responsible for overseeing the cargo and its sale.PLUS turner (goldsmith), worker in wood and iron, alloys, cire perdue metal artificer)

Type 1. miṇḍāl markhor (Tor.wali) meḍho a ram, a sheep (Gujarati)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: meḍ ‘iron’ (Ho.Munda.Santali), mRdu ‘iron’ (Samskrtam), med ‘copper’ (Slavic)

  1. Standing person with spread legs: Hieroglyph:कर्णक  karṇaka m. du. the twolegs spread out AV. xx,133,3 karaNika ‘spread legs‘ Rebus: कारणिक [p= 274,3] (g. काश्य्-ादि) ” investigating , ascertaining the cause ” , a judge Pan5cat. a teacher MBh. ii , 167. कर्णिक [p= 257,2] m. a steersman W.  karṇadhāra m. ʻhelmsman’
  2. Seated person: Hieroglyph: kamaDha ‘penance’ rebus: kammaTa ‘mint, coiner, coinage’

Type 2. Type 1 rebus readings PLUS ayo‘fish’ Rebus: ayo ‘iron’ ayas, ‘metal’ (Gujarati.Rgveda)

Type 3. Type 1 rebus readings PLUS eraka ‘upraised arm’ rebus: erako ‘moltencast, copper’

Type 4. Type 1 rebus readings PLUS PLUS  कोंद kōnda ‘young bull‘ rebus:  kōnda ‘turner’ PLUS baḍhia = a castrated boar, a hog; rebus:baḍhi ‘a caste who work both in iron and wood’.PLUS text message:

Top Line: Sign 409-Sign342-Sign326 (Alternative Sign47)

Second Line from top:Illegible*-Sign182-Sign162-Sign373

Third line Sign 155-Illegible*-Sign336

The hieroglyphs are Meluhha rebus renderings:

Top Line:

‘two cartwheels and axle rod of the cartframe‘sal ‘wedge joining the parts of a solid cart wheel’ (Santali) Rebus: sal ‘workshop’ (Santali)

karNIka ‘rim of jar’ (Samskritam); kanka ‘rim of jar’ (Santali) rebus:karNI ‘supercargo’

loa ‘ficus religiosa’ Rebus: loh ‘copper’ Alternate reading: Sign47 baraḍo = spine; backbone (Tulu) Rebus: baran, bharat ‘mixed alloys’ (5 copper, 4 zinc and 1 tin) (Punjabi)

Thus, together, the sequence of three hieroglyphs signify: loh, ‘copper’; karNI, ‘supercargo’; sal ‘workshop’.

Second line:

ranku ‘antelope’ rebus: ranku ‘tin’

kolom ‘rice-plant’ rebus: kolimi ‘smithy, forge’

mũh, mũhe ingot‘.Alternative:  goṭā ʻ seed, bean, wholeʼ goṭa ’roundish pebble’ rebus:  goṭa ‘ferrite ore, laterite’ rebus 2: goṭa m. ʻedging of gold braidʼ (Kashmiri)

Third line:

khaNDa ‘arrow’ rebus: khaNDa ‘implements’

muka ‘ladle‘ PLUS baTa ‘rimless pot’ Rebus: mũh, mũhe ingot‘.PLUS bhaTa ‘furnace’

Thus, the inscription text reading is: loh, ‘copper’; karNI, ‘supercargo’; sal ‘workshop’.PLUS ranku ‘tin’ kolimi ‘smithy, forge’, goṭa m. ʻedging of gold braidʼ PLUS furnace (for) ingots.

 

All four types of anthropomorphs of Copper Hoard Culture are dharma saṁjñā ‘metalwork signifiers of responsibilities in guild or professional calling cards’

Anthropomorphs with Indus Script hieroglyphs (as orthographic forms) are dharma saṁjñā, signifiers of corporate metalwork responsibilities of boatmen, the holders of the metal tokens

With the discovery of 31 anthropomorphs in Madarpur, Uttar Pradesh, the total number of such anthropomorphs in India and in Sultanate of Oman has crossed 46 artefacts.

Four of these have been found in Lothal, Haryana, Bihar and Oman. Most artefacts which belong to the prehistoric copper hoard culture dated to earlier than ca. 2nd millennium BCE, have been found in the Ganga-Sarasvati doab.The significance of these anthropomorphs has been debated (See Anthropomorph Bibligraphy appended).

TypeI Type II (Indus Script ‘fish’ hieroglyph)Type III (Seated,with right arm upraised)

Type IV (Indus Script ‘boar’ ligature & ‘yong bull’ hieroglyh inscribed)                  

Paul Yule had identified Type I and Type II artefacts from among the Copper Hoard Culture finds as anthropomorph types based on orthographic features. With the discovery of new artefacts of the Copper Hoard Culture, the typology can now be extended to four types of anthropomorphs. The types are: Type I semi-circular headed, curved arms signifying ram’s horns, standing with pread legs; Type II similar to Type I but with Indus script incription of ‘fish’ hieroglyph; Type III similar to Type I but with variants of ‘seated posture’ and one right arm lift upwards; and Type IV similar to Type I but with Indus Script inscriptions/ligatures of boar’s head and hieroglyph of one-horned young bull.

The findspot of Type II anthropomorph (with ‘fish’ hieroglyph) is Sheorajpur where an ancient Shiva temple has been discovered. The temple ceiling is decorated with metalwork plates of sculptural friezes attesting to the metalwork tradition of the site during the Bronze Age (See appended note with photographs: About a temple in Sheorajpur with metal ceiling).

Apart from the insribed or ligatured anthropomorphs with Indus Script hieroglyphs, the link to Indus Script tradition is validated by the finds of anthropomorphs in Sultanate of Oman dated to ca. 1900 BCe and to the find of an anthropomorph in Lothal (2500 BCE?). Thus, the Copper Hoard Culture can be seen as a continuum of the Bronze Age Revolution evidenced by the Indus Script Corpora of over 7000 inscriptions, all related to metalwork catalogues or data archives.

It is submitted, that the anthropomorphs of Copper Hoard Culture are a reinforcement of the Indus Script decipherent as metalwork cataloguing in Prakrtam (Indian sprachbund), a cipher system mentioned by Vatsyayana as mlecchita vikalpa ‘lit.cipher of mleccha/meluhha, ‘copper workers’).

While many anthropomorph examples are of small size which led Paul Yule to infer that they did not have utilitarian value as ‘metal’, some examples ahve been reported from Metmuseum of anthropomorphs of  sizes 4 1/2 x 3 15/16 in. and 6 1/8 x 4 7/8 in. which have led to their identification as axe-heads or ax celts or copper ingots.

 

I suggest that all the anthropomorphs are orthographic form hieroglyphs of Indus Script to signify metalwork dharma saṁjñā ‘signifiers of resonsibilities (in guild — as artisans/seafaring merchants) or professional calling cards’.

 

Such  dharma saṁjñā may have been disseminated as badges to herald or proclaim the holders’ professional competence in metalwork.

RV 1.10.1 indicates ‘worshippers held aloft as it were (on) a pole’ during INdra dhvaja festivals. It is possible that such anthropomorphs were held aloft on poles as exhibits during festivals to proclaim to the people, the new competence in metalwork.

Ax in Anthropomorphic Shape

 

Date:

1500–500 B.C.

Culture:

India

Medium:

Copper

Dimensions:

4 1/2 x 3 15/16 in. (11.4 x 10.0 cm)

Classification:

Metalwork

Credit Line:

Samuel Eilenberg Collection, Bequest of Samuel Eilenberg, 1998

Accession Number:

2001.433.8

http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/50575

 

Anthropomorphic Celt

Date:

1500–500 B.C.

Culture:

India

Medium:

Copper

Dimensions:

6 1/8 x 4 7/8 in. (15.6 x 12.4 cm)

Classification:

Metalwork

Credit Line:

Samuel Eilenberg Collection, Bequest of Samuel Eilenberg, 1998

Accession Number:

2001.433.76 http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/56620

 

See: http://www.jorhsa.com/Edition_2015/Copper.pdf

Anthropomorphic figures of Type I (Left: from Bisauli; right: unknown provenance; scale 1:3; drawn by Petra Thalmeier after Yule 1985, pl. 11, No. 239 and Yule 1989, Fig. 10, No. 1123)(After Fig. 1 in Jürgen W. Frembgen, 1996, 0p. 178)

 

Fish sign incised on  copper anthropomorph, Sheorajpur, upper Ganges valley,   ca. 2nd millennium BCE,   4 kg; 47.7 X 39 X 2.1 cm. State Museum,   Lucknow (O.37) Typical find of Gangetic Copper Hoards. Sheorajpur anthropomorph with ‘fish’ hieroglyph and ‘markhor’ horns hieroglyph. ayo‘fish’ Rebus: ayo ‘iron, metal’ (Gujarati) miṇḍāl markhor (Tor.wali) meḍho a ram, a sheep (Gujarati)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: meḍ ‘iron’ (Ho.) karNaka ‘spread legs’ rebus:karNI ‘supercargo’.

 

Anthropomorphic figure of Type II from Sheorajpur (Inv. No. O 37a, State Museum of Lucknow). The remarkable feature of this type is that a ‘fish’ hieroglyph of Indus Script is incised on the chest of the anthropomorph which stands with spread legs. ayo, aya ‘fish’ rebus: aya ‘iron’ ayas ‘metal’ PLUS karNaka ‘spread legs’ (Atharvaveda) rebus: karNI ‘supercargo, a representative of the ship’s owner on board a merchant ship, responsible for overseeing the cargo and its sale.) The shape of all three types is patterned like the horns of a ram: miṇḍāl ‘markhor’ (Tōrwālī) Rebus: mẽṛhẽt, meḍ ‘iron’ (Mu.Ho.) med ‘copper’ (Slavic)

miṇḍāl ‘markhor’ (Tōrwālī) meḍho a ram, a sheep (Gujarati)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: mẽṛhẽt, meḍ ‘iron’ (Mu.Ho.) Meluhha glosses are annexed which indicate association with cire perdue (or lost wax) method of casting metals using beeswax, particularly in the glosses for miedź, med’  ‘copper’ in Northern Slavic and Altaic languages.

Markhor (Capra falconeri)Punjabi. mẽḍhā m. ‘markhor’.(CDIAL 10310)Rebus: mẽḍh ‘iron’ (Mu.) An exact rebus match is provided in two lexemic groups denoting a ‘ram’, and ‘iron’. It is notable that ‘ram’ is a vividly orthographed Indus script glyph with wavy horns:

 

[Allographs: 1. Or. meṭṭā ʻ hillock ʼ. 2. Or. meṇḍā ʻ lump, clot ʼ.(CDIAL 10308)M. meḍ(h), meḍhī f., meḍhā m. ʻ post, forked stake ʼ.(CDIAL 10317) S. mī˜ḍhī f., °ḍho m. ʻ braid in a woman’s hair ʼ, L. mē̃ḍhī f.; G. mĩḍlɔ, miḍ° m. ʻ braid of hair on a girl’s forehead ʼ; M. meḍhā m. ʻ curl, snarl, twist or tangle in cord or thread ʼ.मेढा [ mēḍhā ] meṇḍa A twist or tangle arising in thread or cord, a curl or snarl. (Marathi) (CDIAL 10312). meḍhi, miḍhī, meṇḍhī = a plait in a woman’s hair; a plaited or twisted strand of hair (P.)(CDIAL 10312)].

 

  1. semantics ‘iron’: meḍ ‘iron’ (Ho)meṛed (Mundari);mẽṛed iron; enga meṛed soft iron; sanḍi meṛed hard iron; ispāt meṛed steel; dul meṛed cast iron; i meṛed rusty iron, also the iron of which weights are cast; bica meṛed iron extracted from stone ore; bali meṛed iron extracted from sand ore; meṛed-bica = iron stone ore, in contrast to bali-bica, iron sand ore (Mu.lex.)

 

  1. semantics ‘ram or markhor’: A variety of forms एड, ēḍa, mēḍa, mēṣá — point to collision with Aryn mḗḍhra (providing a form bhēḍra), Austro-Asiatic mēḍa and Dravidian ēḍa:

 

menda(A) {N} “^sheep”. *Des.menda(GM) `sheep’. #21810. me~Da o~?-Doi {N} “^lamb”. |me~Da `^sheep’. @N0747. #6052. gadra me~Da {N} “^ram, ^male ^sheep”. |me~Da `sheep’. @N0745. #7240. me~Da {N} “^sheep”. *De. menda (GM). @N0744. #14741.

me~Da o?~-Doi {N} “^lamb”. |o~?-Doi `young of an animal’. @N0747. #14750.

gadra me~Da {N} “^ram”. |gadra `male of sheep or goat’. @N0745. #14762.

peti me~Da {N} “^ewe (without young)”. |peti `young female of sheep or goat’. @N0746. #14772.me~Da o~?-Doi {N} “^lamb”. |me~Da `^sheep’. @N0747. #6053.peti me~Da {N} “^ewe (without young)”. |me~Da `sheep’. @N0746. #14773. menda(KMP) {N} “^sheep [MP], ewe [K], ram, ^wether [P]”. Cf. merom `goat’, boda `??’. *O.menda, B.mera, H.merha, Sk.lex, ~medhra, ~mendha, Sa.bheda `ram’, ~bhidi `sheep’, MuNbhera, MuHbera `ram’, Mu., Kh bheri(AB) `sheep’, H., O. bhera `ram’, H. bhera `sheep’. %21781. #21611.

menda kOnOn (P) {N} “^lamb”. | konon `child’. *$Ho mindi hon . %21790. #21620.

mendi (P) {N} “^sheep”. *$Mu., Ho, Bh. mindi . %21800. #21630. meram (P),, merom (KMP) {N} “^goat [MP], she-goat [K]”. Cf. menda `sheep’. *Kh., Sa., Mu., Ho merom , So. k+mmEd/-mEd , Nic. me ; cf. O., Bh. mera `goat’. %21821. #21651. meram kOnOn (P),, merom kOnOn (P) {N} “^kid”. | konon `child’. merom (KMP),, meram (P) {N} “^goat [MP], she-goat [K]”. Cf. menda `sheep’. *Kh., Sa., Mu., Ho merom , So. k+mmEd/-mEd , Nic. me ; cf. O., Bh. mera `goat’. %21851. #21681. bheri (D),, bheri (AB) {NA} “^sheep [ABD]; ^bear [D]”. *@. ??VAR. #3251. menda ,, mendi {N} “^sheep”. @7906. ??M|F masc|fem #19501. menda (B)F {N(M)} “(male) ^sheep”. Fem. mendi . *Loan. @B21460,N760. #22531.Ju menda (KMP) {N} “^sheep [MP], ewe [K], ram, ^wether [P]”. Cf. merom `goat’, boda `??’. *O. menda , B. mera , H. merha , Sk. lex , ~ medhra , ~ mendha , Sa. bheda `ram’, ~ bhidi `sheep’, MuN bhera , MuH bera `ram’, Mu., Kh. bheri (AB) `sheep’, H., O. bhera `ram’, H. bhera `sheep’.Ju meram (P),, merom (KMP) {N} “^goat [MP], she-goat [K]”. Cf. menda `sheep’. *Kh., Sa., Mu., Ho merom , So. k+mmEd/-mEd , Nic. me ; cf. O., Bh. mera `goat’.Ju merego (P),, mergo (P),, mirigo (M) {N} “^deer”. *Sa. mirgi jel `a certain kind of deer’, H. mrgo `deer’, antelope, O. mrgo , Sk. mrga . Ju merom (KMP),, meram (P) {N} “^goat [MP], she-goat [K]”. Cf. menda `sheep’. *Kh., Sa., Mu., Ho merom , So. k+mmEd/-mEd , Nic. me ; cf. O., Bh. mera `goat’.Go menda (A) {N} “^sheep”. *Des. menda (GM) `sheep’.Gu me~Da {N} “^sheep”. *Des. menda (GM).Re menda (B)F {N(M)} “(male) ^sheep”. Fem. mendi . *Loan.(Munda etyma. STAMPE-DM–MP.NEW.84, 20-Jun-85 13:32:53, Edit by STAMPE-D Pinnow Versuch and Munda’s thesis combined).

 

mēṭam (Ta.);[← Austro — as. J. Przyluski BSL xxx 200: perh. Austro — as. *mēḍra ~ bhēḍra collides with Aryan mḗḍhra — 1 in mēṇḍhra — m. ʻ penis ʼ BhP., ʻ ram ʼ lex. — See also bhēḍa — 1, mēṣá — , ēḍa — . — The similarity between bhēḍa — 1, bhēḍra — , bhēṇḍa — ʻ ram ʼ and *bhēḍa — 2 ʻ defective ʼ is paralleled by that between mḗḍhra — 1, mēṇḍha — 1 ʻ ram ʼ and *mēṇḍa — 1, *mēṇḍha — 2 (s.v. *miḍḍa — ) ʻ defective ʼ]

 

ऐड coming from the sheep एड MBh. viii. इडिक्क [p= 164, Monier-Williams] A wild goat. इडविडा 1 A species of she-goat. mother of कुवेर VP. BhP. [Kuvera, Kubera is king of the yakshas and god of wealth (buried treasure, nidhi]. -2 The bleating of a goat; सो$पि चानुगतः स्त्रैणं कृपणस्तां प्रसादितुम् । कुर्वन्निडविडा- कारं नाशक्नोत्पथि सन्धितुम् ॥ Bhāg.9.19.9. इडा iḍā ला lā 3 An offering, libation (coming between प्रयाज and अनुयाज); अग्निश्चते योनिरिडा च देहः Mb.3.114.28. -4 Refreshing draught. -5 (Hence) Food. -6 (Fig.) Stream or flow of praise or worship personified as the goddess of sacred speech; इडोपहूताः क्रोशन्ति कुञ्जरास्त्वङ्कुशेरिताः Mb.12.98.26.(Apte lex.)

 

Ta. yāṭu, āṭu goat, sheep; āṭṭ-āḷ shepherd. Ma. āṭu goat, sheep; āṭṭukāran shepherd. Ko. a·ṛ (obl. a·ṭ-) goat. To. o·ḍ id. Ka. āḍu id. Koḍ. a·ḍï id. Tu. ēḍů id. Te. ēḍika, (B.) ēṭa ram. Go. (Tr. Ph. W.) yēṭī, (Mu. S.) ēṭi she-goat (Voc. 376). Pe. ōḍa goat. Manḍ. ūḍe id. Kui ōḍa id. Kuwi (Mah. p. 110) o’ḍā, (Ḍ.) ōḍa id. Kur. ēṛā she-goat. Malt. éṛe id. Br. hēṭ id. / Cf. Skt. eḍa-, eḍaka-, eḍī- a kind of sheep(DEDR 5152)ēḍa m. ʻ a kind of sheep ʼ KātyŚr., ēḍī — f., ēḍaka — 1 m. ʻ a sheep or goat ʼ, aiḍa — ʻ ovine ʼ MBh., aiḍaká m. ʻ a kind of sheep ʼ ŚBr., iḍikka — f. ʻ wild goat ʼ lex. [← Drav. EWA i 126 with lit.]Pa. eḷaka — m. ʻ ram, wild goat ʼ, °akā — , °ikā — , °ikī — f.; Aś. eḍaka — m. ʻ ram ʼ, °kā — f. ʻ ewe ʼ, NiDoc. heḍ’i ʻ sheep (?) ʼ Burrow KharDoc 10 (cf. h — in Brahui hēṭ ʻ she — goat ʼ); Pk. ēla — , °aya — m. ʻ ram ʼ, ēliyā — f., ēḍayā — f., ēḍakka — m., Paš. weg. ēṛāˊ, kuṛ. e_ṛṓ, ar. yeṛó, že° m. ʻ ram ʼ, weg. ēṛī, kuṛ. e_°, ar. ye° f. ʻ ewe ʼ; Shum. yēṛə, yeṛṓlik m. ʻ sheep ʼ, yeṛélik f., Gaw. ēṛa, yē° m., ēṛī, yē° f., Bshk. īr f., Tor. öi f. (less likely < ávi — ), Mai. “‘ī” Barth NTS xviii 123, Sv. yeṛo m., ēṛia f., Phal. yīṛo m., °ṛi f., Sh. jij. ḗṛi; S. eli — pavharu m. ʻ goatherd ʼ; Si. eḷuvā ʻ goat ʼ; <-> X bhēḍra — q.v.*kaiḍikā — .(CDIAL 2512).

 

*mēṇḍharūpa ʻ like a ram ʼ. [mēṇḍha — 2, rūpá — ]Bi. mẽṛhwā ʻ a bullock with curved horns like a ram’s ʼ; M. mẽḍhrū̃ n. ʻ sheep ʼ.(CDIAL 10311)mēṣá m. ʻ ram ʼ, °ṣīˊ — f. ʻ ewe ʼ RV. 2. mēha — 2, miha- m. lex. [mēha — 2 infl. by mḗhati ʻ emits semen ʼ as poss. mēḍhra — 2 ʻ ram ʼ (~ mēṇḍha — 2) by mḗḍhra — 1 ʻ penis ʼ?]1. Pk. mēsa — m. ʻ sheep ʼ, Ash. mišalá; Kt. məṣe/l ʻ ram ʼ; Pr. məṣé ʻ ram, oorial ʼ; Kal. meṣ, meṣalák ʻ ram ʼ, H. mes m.; — X bhēḍra — q.v.

  1. K. myã̄ — pūtu m. ʻ the young of sheep or goats ʼ; WPah.bhal. me\i f. ʻ wild goat ʼ; H. meh m. ʻ ram ʼ. (CDIAL 10334)*mēṣakuṭī — ʻ hut for sheep ʼ [mēṣá — , kuṭī — ] or †*mēṣamaṭha — ʻ fold for sheep ʼ. [mēṣá — , maṭha — 1]WPah.kṭg. mhōˋṛ m. ʻ shed for sheep at high altitudes ʼ or poss. rather < maṭha — (CDIAL 10334a) meṣam (Skt.) miṇḍāl ‘markhor’ (Tōrwālī) meḍho a ram, a sheep (G.)(CDIAL 10120) miṇḍ ‘ram’ (Pktl.); mẽḍha (G.) cf. mēṣa = goat (Skt.lex.) மேடம்¹ mēṭam, n. < mēṣa. 1. Sheep, ram; ஆடு. (பிங்.) 2. Aries of the zodiac; ராசிமண்டலத்தின் முதற்பகுதி. (பிங்.) 3. The first solar month. See சித்திரை¹, 2. மேடமாமதி (கம்பரா. திருவவதா. 110) ēḍika. [Tel. of Tam ఆడు.] n. A ram (Telugu) मेंढा [ mēṇḍhā ] m (मेष S through H) A male sheep, a ram or tup. (Marathi) meṇḍa The Ved. (Sk.) word for ram is meṣa] 1. a ram D i.9; J iv.250, 353 (˚visāṇa — dhanu, a bow consisting of a ram’s horn). — ˚patha Npl. “ram’s road” Nd1 155=415. — ˚yuddha ram fight D i.6. — मेष [p= 833, Monier-Williams]m. ( √2. मिष्) a ram , sheep (in the older language applied also to a fleece or anything woollen) RV. &c. मेढ्रः [मिह्-ष्ट्रन्], मेढ्रकः mēḍhrakḥ, मेण्ढः mēṇḍhḥ मेण्ढकः mēṇḍhakḥ A ram (Apte.lexicon)bhēḍa1 m. ʻ sheep ʼ, bhaiḍaka — ʻ of sheep ʼ lex. [bhēḍra- X ēḍa — ?] Ash. biar ʻ she — goat ʼ, Pr. byär, Bshk. bür; Tor. birāṭh ʻ he — goat ʼ, Phal. bhīṛo: all with AO viii 300 doubtful. (CDIAL 9604). bhēḍra — , bhēṇḍa — m. ʻ ram ʼ lex. Ḍ. bēḍa f. ʻ sheep ʼ, K.ḍoḍ. bhĕḍă pl., L. bheḍ̠ f., awāṇ. bheḍ, bhiḍ, P. bheḍ, °ḍī f., °ḍā m.; WPah.bhal. (LSI) ḍhleḍḍ, (S. Varma) bheṛ, pl. °ṛã f. ʻ sheep and goats ʼ, bhad. bheḍḍ, cur. bhraḍḍ, bhēḍḍū, cam. bhēṛ, khaś. bhiḍṛu n. ʻ lamb ʼ; Ku. N. bheṛo ʻ ram ʼ, bheṛi ʻ ewe ʼ; A. bherā, bhẽrā ʻ sheep ʼ; B. bheṛ ʻ ram ʼ, °ṛā ʻ sheep ʼ, °ṛi ʻ ewe ʼ, Or. bheṛā, °ṛi, bhẽṛi; Bi. bhẽṛ ʻ sheep ʼ, °ṛā ʻ ram ʼ; Mth. bhẽṛo, °ṛī; Bhoj. bheṛā ʻ ram ʼ; Aw.lakh. bhẽṛī ʻ sheep ʼ; H. bheṛ, °ṛī f., °ṛā m., G. bheṛi f.; — X mēṣá — : Kho. beṣ ʻ young ewe ʼ BelvalkarVol 88. bhēḍra — : WPah.kṭg. (kc.) bhèṛ m. ʻ sheep ʼ, bhèṛi f., J. bheḍ m. (CDIAL 9606) Note: It may not be mere coincidence that a temple of the ram-god was found in Mendes (ca. 4th millennium BCE). The word, Mendes is read as: mend + ayo (ram + fish) rebus: iron (metal) merchant. Worshipping ancestors, the Mendes might have signified the memory of the metalwork and trade in metalwork of ancestors. See more on Mendes:http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/d/b/dbr3/mendes.html

A third type which may be called Type III is found from the hoard of 31 anthropomorphs discovered in Madarpur. This type shows the anthropomorph in a seated posture (NOT standing with spread legs). One of these 31 artifacts also has a variant shape of ‘arms’; the right arm in one artifacts is lifted upwards which is also an Indus Script hieroglyph: eraka ‘upraised hand’ rebus: eraka ‘copper’.

Six of the 31 anthropormphs discovered in Madarpur, Uttr Pradesh. The artefact on the left on the top line may be seen as Type III anthropomorph since it has a seated posture and has its rightg arm upraised.

20 of the 31 anthropomorphs discovered in Madarpur, Uttar Pradesh.

 

A fourth type Type IV anthropomorph has been reported from Haryana (unprovenanced). It is an anthropomorph which extends the Indus script hieroglyph mode seen on Sheorajpur anthropomorph to ligature the head of the anthropomorph with the head of a boar PLUS incise a hieroglyph of one-horned young bull on the chest. Two examples of this Type IV anthropomorph have been cited.

  1. Anthropomorph reported by Art Curator,Naman Ahuja in 2014. R. Anthropomorph reported bySanjay Manjul, Director, Institute of Archaeology, Delhi Museum, ASI in August 2015. “A composite copper Anthropomorphic figure along with a copper sword was found by the speaker at the Central Antiquity Section, ASI, Purana Qila in 2005. This composite copper Anthropomorph is a solitary example in the copper hoard depicting a Varah head. The Anthropomorphic figure, its inscription and animal motif that it bears, illustrate the continuity between the Harappan and Early Historical period.” An animal-headed anthropomorph http://www.business-standard.com/article/specials/naman-ahuja-is-mastering-the-art-of-reaching-out-114092501180_1.html

“These are very abstract figures, which were published in various articles, have common characteristics, namely a semicircular head directly restingon the shoulders, volute-like scrolled arms on both sides, and pointed open legs. Paul Yule distinguishes two types: Type I has thinner legs, which are extremely spread: ‘Fashioned from thick metal sheeting, these artifacts have stocky proportion and are patterned on both sides with elongated gouges or dents which usually are lengthwise oriented. Type II anthropomorphs are proportionately longer than those of type I and show a curious and distinctive thickening of the metal on the upper margin of the ‘head’. In section the ‘arms’are triangular, the most acute angle being outward. The ‘legs’ and ‘trunk’ are rectangular in cross section […] The artifacts are morphologically homogenous except for No…. (Yule, 1985: 52.)’”

In an ethnological interpretation, Jurgen W. Frembigen suggested: “To sum up the hypothesis, one can say that – in the light of comparative ethnographical and ethological data – the North Indian copper age anthropomorphs most probably represent fmale fertility figures of a specific dominnt and provocative type.” (Jürgen W. Frembgen, 1996, On Copper Age Anthropomorphic Figures from North India An Ethnological Interpretation, in: East and West

Vol. 46, No. 1/2 (June 1996), pp. 177-182, p.181) Published by: Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente (IsIAO)

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/29757261.


About a temple in Sheorajpur with metal ceiling 

Many bronze artifacts are also venerated in the temple.

 

I hope some researcher will find out the sources for these bronze/brass marvels which echoe the anthropomorph of ancient India?

Sheorajpur anthropomorph with ‘fish’ hieroglyph and ‘markhor’ horns hieroglyph. ayo‘fish’ Rebus: ayo ‘iron, metal’ (Gujarati) miṇḍāl markhor (Tor.wali) meḍho a ram, a sheep (Gujarati)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: meḍ ‘iron’ (Ho.)

Prima facie, it appears that these are products of dhokra kamar

metalworkers
NB: Some historical notes:

Pratihara emperor, Mihir Bhoja, has ruled in nearby Kanpur since nearby Kannuaj was the capital of Parihar. At Shivrajpur, 20 km from the Kanpur Central railway station, there is an ancient temple built by Chandel Raja Sati Prasad. The history of the temple and architecture needs further investigations and researches.

Fish-fin incised on the chest of the anthropomorph from Sheorajpur. Two types of inscribed anthropomorphs with hieroglyphs have been discovered in the copperwork areas of Bharatam, in particular the regions classified as copper complexes such as Ahar-Banas region of Rajasthan (close to the Khetri copper belt). 

A brilliant exposition on the etymology of the word  Varāha is provided by वाचस्पत्यम् Vācaspatyam: वराय अभीष्ठाय मुस्तादिलाभाय आहन्ति खनति भूमिम्  To represent a boon, (to obtain) wished, desired products (including species of grass) mined from the earth, by striking, hitting. Thus, Varāha is a hieroglyph metaphor to represent, signify mining for minerals.

Both anthropomorphs are shaped like a standing person with spread legs and with the horns of a markhor or ram. 

Type 1 Anthropomorph: metalworker (mintworker), merchant


On one type of anthropomorph, an additional hieroglyph is incised. That of ‘fish with fins’. The reading of hieroglyphs in Indus Script cipher: ayo ‘fish’ rebus: aya ‘iron’ ayas ‘metal’ PLUS 
miṇḍāl markhor (Tor.wali) meḍho a ram, a sheep (G.)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: meḍh ‘helper of merchant’ (Gujarati) mẽṛhẽt, meḍ ‘iron’ (Mu.Ho.) med ‘copper’ (Slavic) meṛed-bica = iron stone ore, in contrast to bali-bica, iron sand ore (Munda) ayo ‘fish’ Rebus: ayo, ‘iron’, ayas ‘metal. Thus, together read rebus: ayo meḍh  ‘iron stone ore, metal merchant.’ Hieroglyph: Spread legs: कर्णक m. du. the two legs spread out AV. xx , 133 ‘spread legs’; (semantic determinant) Rebus: karNa ‘helmsman’, karNI ‘scribe, account’ ‘supercargo’. Thus, the hieroglyphs on the anthropomorph Type 2 signify a helmsman, engraver who works with alloys of metals to produce supercargo of mined products.

Type 2 Anthropomorph: miner (worker in wood and iron), merchant


On the second type of anthropomorph, a Varāha head is ligatured to the top of the anthropomorph and an additional hieroglyph is incised on the chest: That of a ‘one-horned young bull’ which accounts for nearly 80% of pictorial motifs on Indus Script seals. 
miṇḍāl markhor (Tor.wali) meḍho a ram, a sheep (G.)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: meḍh ‘helper of merchant’ (Gujarati) mẽṛhẽt, meḍ ‘iron’ (Mu.Ho.) med ‘copper’ (Slavic) meṛed-bica = iron stone ore, in contrast to bali-bica, iron sand ore (Munda) Hieorglyph of one-horned bull inscribed on chest: khoṇḍ, kõda ‘young bull-calf’ Rebus: kũdār ‘turner’. कोंद kōnda ‘engraver, lapidary setting or infixing gems’ (Marathi) Hieorglyph: boar: baḍhia = a castrated boar, a hog; rebus: baḍhi ‘a caste who work both in iron and wood’; baḍhoe ‘a carpenter, worker in wood’; badhoria ‘expert in working in wood’(Santali) ‘Rebus: bari ‘merchant’.barea ‘merchant’ (Santali)বরাহ barāha ‘boar’Rebus: bāṛaï ‘carpenter’ (Bengali) bari ‘merchant’ barea ‘merchant’ (Santali) Varāha is explained by वाचस्पत्यम् Vācaspatyam: वराय अभीष्ठाय मुस्तादिलाभाय आहन्ति खनति भूमिम्  To represent a boon, (to obtain) wished, desired products (including species of grass) mined from the earth, by striking, hitting. Hieroglyph: Spread legs: कर्णक m. du. the two legs spread out AV. xx , 133 ‘spread legs’; (semantic determinant) Rebus: karNa ‘helmsman’, karNI ‘scribe, account’ ‘supercargo’. Thus, the hieroglyphs on the anthropomorph Type 2 signify a helmsman, engraver who works with metals and mines to produce supercargo of mined products. (Note: I had suggested that the head ligature on the anthropomorph signifies a crocodile, but Dr. Sanjay Manjul’s suggestion that it signifies head of a boar is consistent with the Vedic metaphor and tradition of Varāha. I correct my identification and read the Anthropomorph head as signifier of Varāha.)

A composite copper Anthropomorphic figure along with a copper sword was found by Dr. Sanjay Manjul, Director, Institute of Archaeology at the Central Antiquity Section, ASI, Purana Qila in 2005. This composite copper Anthropomorph is a solitary example in the copper hoard depicting aVarah head. The Anthropomorphic figure, its inscription and animal motif that it bears, illustrate the continuity between the Harappan and Early Historical period

Chalcolitique du bassin Gange-Yamuna. 2800 – 1500 avant notre ère. Provenance : Bisauli (212 km de New Delhi), district de Badaun, Uttar Pradesh. Bharat Kala Bhavan, Varanasi. Inv. n° 94620 et 94621

Anthropomorphic figures, formed from copper/bronze. Northern India, Doab region, circa 1500.-1200 BCE. Anthropomorph is a signature tune of copper hoard culture.

Composite copper alloy anthropomorphic Meluhha hieroglyphs of Haryana and Sheorajpur: fish, markhor, crocodile, one-horned young bull

 

Mirror: https://www.academia.edu/12200059/Composite_copper_alloy_anthropomorphic_Meluhha_hieroglyphs_of_Haryana_and_Sheorajpur_fish_markhor_crocodile_one-horned_young_bull

 

Oxford English Dictionary defines anthropomorphic: “a. treating the deity as anthropomorphous, or as having a human form and character; b. attributing a human personality to anything impersonal or irrational.”

The copper anthropomorph of Haryana is comparable to and an elaboration of a copper anthropomorph of Sheorajpur, Uttar Pradesh. Both deploy Meluhha hieroglyphs using rebus-metonymy layered cipher of Indus writing.

The hieroglyhs of the anthropomorphs are a remarkable archaeological evidence attesting to the evidence of an ancient Samskritam text, Baudhāyana śrautasūtra.

Baudhāyana śrautasūtra 18.44 which documents migrations of Āyu and Amavasu from a central region:

pran Ayuh pravavraja. tasyaite Kuru-Pancalah Kasi-Videha ity. etad Ayavam pravrajam. pratyan amavasus. tasyaite Gandharvarayas Parsavo ‘ratta ity. etad Amavasavam

Trans. Ayu went east, his is the Yamuna-Ganga region (Kuru-Pancala, Kasi-Videha). Amavasu went west, his is Gandhara, Parsu and Araṭṭa.

Ayu went east from Kurukshetra to Kuru-Pancala, Kasi-Videha. The  migratory path of Meluhha artisand in the lineage of Ayu of the Rigvedic tradition, to Kasi-Videha certainly included the very ancient temple town of Sheorajpur of Dist. Etawah (Kanpur), Uttar Pradesh.

Haryana anthropormorph (in the Kurukshetra region on the banks of Vedic River Sarasvati) deploys hieroglyphs of markhor (horns), crocodile and one-horned young bull together with an inscription text using Indus Script hieroglyphs. The Sheorajpur anthropomorph deploys hieroglyphs of markhor (horns) and fish. The astonishing continuity of archaeo-metallurgical tradition of Sarasvati-Sindhu (Hindu) civilization is evident from a temple in Sheorajpur on the banks of Sacred River Ganga. This temple dedicated to Siva has metalwork ceilings !!!

Both anthropomorph artefacts in copper alloy are metalwork catalogs of dhokara kamar ‘cire perdue(lost-wax) metal casters’.

Hieroglyhph: eraka ‘wing’ Rebus: eraka, arka ‘copper’.In 2003, Paul Yule wrote a remarkable article on metallic anthropomorphic figures derived from Magan/Makkan, i.e. from an Umm an-Nar period context in al-Aqir/Bahla’ in the south-western piedmont of the western Hajjar chain. “These artefacts are compared with those from northern Indian in terms of their origin and/or dating. They are particularly interesting owing to a secure provenance in middle Oman…The anthropomorphic artefacts dealt with…are all the more interesting as documents of an ever-growing body of information on prehistoric international contact/influence bridging the void between south-eastern Arabia and South Asia…Gerd Weisgerber recounts that in winter of 1983/4…al-Aqir near Bahla’ in the al-Zahirah Wilaya delivered prehistoric planoconvex ‘bun’ ingots and other metallic artefacts from the same find complex…”

In the following plate, Figs. 1 to 5 are anthropomorphs, with ‘winged’ attributes. The metal finds from the al-Aqir wall include ingots, figures, an axe blade, a hoe, and a cleaver (see fig. 1, 1-8), all in copper alloy.

 

Title / Object:  anthropomorphic sheorajpur

Fund context:  Saipai, Dist. Kanpur

Time of admission:     1981

Pool:    SAI South Asian Archaeology

 

Image ID:        213 101

Copyright:       Dr Paul Yule, Heidelberg

Photo credit:    Yule, Metalwork of the Bronze in India, Pl 23 348 (dwg)

Saipal, Dist. Etawah, UP. Anthropomorph, type I. 24.1×27.04×0.76 cm., 1270 gm., both sides show a chevron patterning, left arm broken off (Pl. 22, 337). Purana Qila Coll. Delhi (74.12/4) — Lal, BB, 1972, 285 fig. 2d pl. 43d

http://heidicon.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/heidicon/239/213101.html

http://katalog.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/cgi-bin/titel.cgi?katkey=900213101

Fig. 1: Prehistoric metallic artefacts from the Sultanate of Oman: 1-8  al-Aqir/Bahla’; 9 Ra’s al-Jins 2, building vii, room 2, period 3 (DA 11961) “The cleaver no. 8 is unparalleled in the prehistory of the entire Near East. Its form resembles an iron coco-nut knife from a reportedly subrecent context in Gudevella (near Kharligarh, Dist. Balangir, Orissa) which the author examined some years ago in India…The dating of the figures, which command our immediate attention, depends on two strands of thought. First, the Umm an-Nar Period/Culture dating mentioned above, en-compasses a time-space from 2500 to 1800 BC. In any case, the presence of “bun“ ingots among the finds by nomeans contradicts a dating for the anthropomorphic figures toward the end of the second millennium BC. Since these are a product of a simple form of copper production, they existed with the beginning of smelting in Oman. The earliest dated examples predate this, i.e. the Umm an-NarPeriod. Thereafter, copper continues to be produced intothe medieval period. Anthropomorphic figures from the Ganges-Yamuna Doab which resemble significantly the al-Aqir artefacts (fig. 2,10-15) form a second line of evidence for the dating. To date, some 21 anthropomorphs from northern India have been published.” (p. 539; cf. Yule, 1985, 128: Yule et al. 1989 (1992) 274: Yule et al 2002. More are known to exist, particularly from a large hoard deriving from Madarpur.)

Fig. 2: Anthropomorphic figures from the Indian Subcontinent. 10 type I, Saipai, Dist. Etawah, U.P.; 11 type I, Lothal, Dist. Ahmedabad,Guj.; 12 type I variant, Madarpur, Dist. Moradabad, U.P.; 13 type II, Sheorajpur, Dist. Kanpur, U.P.; 14 miscellaneous type, Fathgarh,Dist. Farrukhabad, U.P.; 15 miscellaneous type, Dist. Manbhum, Bihar.

The anthropomorph from Lothal/Gujarat (fig. 2,11), from a layer which its excavator dates to the 19 th century BCE. Lothal, phase 4 of period A, type 1. Some anthropomorphs were found stratified together with Ochre-Coloured Pottery, dated to ca. 2nd millennium BCE. Anthropomorph of Ra’s al-Jins (Fig. 1,9) clearly reinforces the fact that South Asians travelled to and stayed at the site of Ra’s al-Jins. “The excavators date the context from which the Ra’s al-Jins copper artefact derived to their period III, i.e. 2300-2200 BCE (Cleuziou & Tosi 1997, 57), which falls within thesame time as at least some of the copper ingots which are represented at al-Aqir, and for example also in contextfrom al-Maysar site M01…the Franco-Italian teamhas emphasized the presence of a settled Harappan-Peri-od population and lively trade with South Asia at Ra’s al-Jins in coastal Arabia. (Cleuziou, S. & Tosi, M., 1997, Evidence for the use of aromatics in the early Bronze Age of Oman, in: A. Avanzini, ed., Profumi d’Arabia, Rome 57-81).”

“In the late third-early second millennium, given the presence of a textually documented ‘Meluhha village’ in Lagash (southern Mesopotamia), one cannot be too surprised that such colonies existed ‘east of Eden’ in south-eastern Arabia juxtaposed with South Asia. In any case, here we encounter yet again evidence for contact between the two regions — a contact of greater intimacy and importance than for the other areas of the Gulf.”(Paul Yule, 2003, Beyond the pale of near Eastern Archaeology: Anthropomorphic figures from al-Aqir near Bahla’ In: Stöllner, T. (Hrsg.): Mensch und Bergbau Studies in Honour of Gerd Weisgerber on Occasion of his 65th Birthday. Bochum 2003, pp. 537-542).

https://www.academia.edu/1043347/Beyond_the_Pale_of_Near_Eastern_Archaeology_Anthropomorphic_Figures_from_al-Aqir_near_Bahl%C4%81_Sultanate_of_Oman )

See: Weisgerber, G., 1988, Oman: A bronze-producing centre during the 1st half of the 1st millennium BCE, in: J. Curtis, ed., Bronze-working centres of western Asia, c. 1000-539 BCE, London, 285-295.

With curved horns, the ’anthropomorph’ is a ligature of a mountain goat or markhor (makara) and a fish incised between the horns. Typical find of Gangetic Copper Hoards.  At Sheorajpur, three anthropomorphs in metal were found. (Sheorajpur, Dt. Kanpur. Three anthropomorphic figures of copper. AI, 7, 1951, pp. 20, 29).

One anthropomorph had fish hieroglyph incised on the chest of  the copper object, Sheorajpur, upper Ganges valley,   ca. 2nd millennium BCE,   4 kg; 47.7 X 39 X 2.1 cm. State Museum,   Lucknow (O.37) Typical find of Gangetic Copper Hoards. miṇḍāl markhor (Tor.wali) meḍho a ram, a sheep (G.)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: meḍh ‘helper of merchant’ (Gujarati) meḍ iron (Ho.) meṛed-bica = iron stone ore, in contrast to bali-bica, iron sand ore (Munda) ayo ‘fish’ Rebus: ayo, ayas ‘metal. Thus, together read rebus: ayo meḍh ‘iron stone ore, metal merchant.’

A remarkable legacy of the civilization occurs in the use of ‘fish‘ sign on a copper anthropomorph found in a copper hoard. This is an apparent link of the ‘fish’ broadly with the profession of ‘metal-work’. The ‘fish’ sign is apparently related to the copper object which seems to depict a ‘fighting ram’ symbolized by its in-curving horns. The ‘fish’ sign may relate to a copper furnace. The underlying imagery defined by the style of the copper casting is the pair of curving horns of a fighting ram ligatured into the outspread legs (of a warrior).

The center-piece of the makara symbolism is that it is a big jhasa, big fish, but with ligatured components (alligator snout, elephant trunk, elephant legs and antelope face). Each of these components can be explained (alligator: manger; elephant trunk: sunda; elephant: ibha; antelope: ranku; rebus: mangar ‘smith’; sunda ‘furnace’; ib ‘iron’; ranku ‘tin’); thus the makara jhasa or the big composite fish is a complex of metallurgical repertoire.)

One nidhi was makara (syn. Kohl, antimony); the second was makara (or, jhasa, fish) [bed.a hako (ayo)(syn. bhed.a ‘furnace’; med. ‘iron’; ayas ‘metal’)]; the third was kharva (syn. karba, iron).

http://katalog.ub.uni-heide

From Lothal was reported a fragmentary Type 1 anthropomorph (13.0 pres. X 12.8 pres. X c. 0.08 cm, Cu 97.27%, Pb 2.51% (Rao), surface ptterning runs lengthwise, lower portion slightly thicker than the edge of the head, ‘arms’ and ‘legs’ broken off (Pl. 1, 22)– ASI Ahmedabad (10918 — Rao, SR, 1958, 13 pl. 21A)

 

The extraordinary presence of a Lothal anthropomorph of the type found on the banks of River Ganga in Sheorajpur (Uttar Pradesh) makes it apposite to discuss the anthropomorph as a Meluhha hieroglyph, since Lothal is reportedly a mature site of the civilization which has produced nearly 7000 inscriptions (what may be called Meluhha almost all

“Anthropomorphs occur in a variety of shapes and sizes (Plate A). The two basic types dominate, as defined by the proportions in combination with certain morphological features. All show processes suggestive of a human head, arms and legs. With one exception (no. 539) all are highly geometricising and flat. Fashioned from thick metal sheeting, these artifacts have stocky proportions and are patterned on both sides with elongated gouches or dents which usually are lengthwise oriented. Sometimes, however, the patterning is chevroned or cross-hatched. Significantly, the upper edge of the ‘head’ shows no thickening, as is the case of type H anthropomorphs. Examples have come to light at mid doab and a broken anthropomorph from distant Lothal as well. The only stratified example derives from Lothal, level IV. height range. 23.2-24.1cm; L/W: 0.65 – 0.88: 1; weight mean: 1260 gm.” (Yule, Paul, pp.51-52).

“Conclusions…”To the west at Harappa Lothal in Gujarat the presence of a fragmentary import type I anthropomorph suggests contact with the doab.” “(p.92)

From Lothal was reported a fragmentary Type 1 anthropomorph (13.0 pres. X 12.8 pres. X c. 0.08 cm, Cu 97.27%, Pb 2.51% (Rao), surface ptterning runs lengthwise, lower portion slightly thicker than the edge of the head, ‘arms’ and ‘legs’ broken off (Pl. 1, 22)– ASI Ahmedabad (10918 — Rao, SR, 1958, 13 pl. 21A)

The extraordinary presence of a Lothal anthropomorph of the type found on the banks of River Ganga in Sheorajpur (Uttar Pradesh) makes it apposite to discuss the anthropomorph as a Meluhha hieroglyph, since Lothal is reportedly a mature site of the civilization which has produced nearly 7000 inscriptions (what may be called Meluhha epigraphs, almost all of which are relatable to the bronze age metalwork of India).

The Sheorajpur anthropomorph (348 on Plate A)  has a ‘fish’ Indus Script hieroglyph incised on the chest.

 

 

Some illustrations of anthropomorphs of various types

Chalcolitique du bassin Gange-Yamuna. 2800 – 1500 avant notre ère. Provenance : Bisauli (212 km de New Delhi), district de Badaun, Uttar Pradesh. Bharat Kala Bhavan, Varanasi. Inv. n° 94620 et 94621

anthropomorphic copper figure (ACCN 93-51) found at Shahabad, UP, now at Government Museum, Mathura.

Source: http://historum.com/asian-history/69989-little-man-huge-potential.html

 

Anthropomorph Bibliography

  1. Balasubramaniam, MN Mungole, VN Prabhakar, DV Sharma and D.Banerjee, 2002, Studies on Ancient Indian OCP Period Copper, in: Indian Journal of History of Science, 37.1 (2002), pp. 1-15 http://www.dli.gov.in/rawdataupload/upload/insa/INSA_1/2000616d_1.pdf

BB Lal, ‘Further copper hoards from Gangetic basin and a review of the problem’, Ancient India, 7 (1951), pp. 20-30

BB Lal, “A not on the excavation at Saipai,’ Puratattva 5 (1971-72), pp. 46-49

Dikshit, KN, ‘The Ochre Coloured Ware settlements in Ganga-Yamuna Doab,’ in: DP Agrawal and DK Chakraborty, ed., Essays in Indian Protohistory,New Delhi, 1979, pp. 285-299.

Kumar, K. ‘The beginnings of the Brahmanical iconography in the Ganga Valley’, Journal of the Indian Society of Oriental Art, New Series, XXII and XXIII (2000), pp,. 27-68.

Ghosh, A., ed., Copper Hoard, Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology, Vol. I, New Delhi, 1989, p. 91

Agrawal, DP, Krishnamurthy RV and Kusumgar, S., ‘New data on the copper hoards and the Daimabad bronzes’, Man and Environment, 2 (1978), pp. 41-46.

Nautiyal, V., Agrawal DP, and Krishnamurthy, RV ‘Some new analysis on the protohistoric copperarts’, Man and Environment,5 (1981),pp. 48-51.

Ball, V. ‘On the ancient coppermines of Singhbhum, Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1869, pp. 170-175.

Smith, VA, 1905, The Copper Age and Prehistoric Bronze Implements of India, The Indian Antiquary, 34, pp. 229-44, pl. II, Fig.5

Piggott, S., 1944, Prehistoric Copper Hoards in the Ganges Basin, Antiquity, 18/72, pp. 173-82.

Agrawala,BC, 1984, A unique copper anthropomorph from Sheorajpur, Kanpur, Bulletin of Museums & Archaelogy, 33-34, pp. 9-10

Yule, PA, 1985, Metalwork of the Bronze Age in India,Munchen, 51-52, pl. A, E (No. 239), 1

0 (No. 241), 11, 15 (No. 255), 22 (No. 337), 23 (No. 348), 24 (No. 345), 25 (No. 350), 47, (No. 336), 48 (No. 537) http://crossasia-repository.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/1895/

Trivedi, SD,1989, Copper Implement (Anthropomorph). In SD Trivedi, Masterpieces in the State Museum, Lucknow, p. 26, Lucknow.

Yule, PA, 1989, The Copper Hoards of the Indian Subcontinent. Preliminaries for an Interpretation, in: Juhrbuch des Romisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseum, Mainz, 36 (Part 1): 201 (No. 1105), 202 (No. 1121-1123), 203 (No. 1128)

http://crossasia-repository.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/509/

Joshi, MP, 1990, New Horizon of the Ganga Valley copper hoard archaeology, Bulletin of Museums & Archaeology, 43-46, pp. 1-7.

Yule, PA, 1993, Uberlegungen zu den frhen Metallarbeiten in Indien, in C.Mallebrein, ed., Die anderen Goiter, Volks- and Stammensbronzen ans Indien, Koln: 56, 59 (ill. P.20)

Mode, H., 1959, Das fruhe Indien, Stuttgart: 108-9, pl. 76

 

Paul Yule, Addenda to “The Copper Hoards of the Indian Subcontinent: Preliminaries for an Interpretation”, Man and Environment 26.2, 2002, 117–120 http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/savifadok/volltexte/2009/510/.

Paul Yule, Beyond the Pale of Near Eastern Archaeology: Anthropomorphic Figures from al-Aqir near Baḥlāʾ, Sultanate of Oman, Man and Mining – T. Stöllner et al. (eds.) Mensch und Bergbau Studies in Honour of Gerd Weisgerber on Occasion of his 65th Birthday, Bochum, 2003, 537–542 http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/propylaeumdok/volltexte/2008/109/ also under the same title in Pragdhara 14, 2004, 231–239; A New Prehistoric Anthropomorphic Figure from the Sharqiyah, Oman, in: ‘My Life is like the Summer Rose’ Maurizio Tosi e l’Archeologia come modo de vivere, Papers in Honour of Maurizio Tosi on his 70th Birthday, C. Lamberg-Karlovsky‒B. Genito‒B. Cerasetti (eds.), BAR Intern. Series 2690, Oxford, 2014, 759–60, ISBN 978 1 4073 1326 9; https://uni-heidelberg.academia.edu/paulyule

 

B.B. Lal, Further Copper Hoards from the Gangetic Basin and a Review of the Problem, Ancient India 7, 1951, 20-39

Tapan Kumar Das Gupta, Die Anthropomorphen Figuren der Kupferhortfunde aus Indien, Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 56, 2009, 39-80.

D.P. Agrawal, The Copper-Bronze Age in India (Delhi, Munshiram Manoharlal1971) 200; Harry Falk, Copper Hoard Weapons and the Vedic Vajra, South Asian Archaeology 1993 (Helsinki 1994) 193-206.

Monika Zin, Vajrapāṇi in the Narrative Reliefs, in: Migration, Trade and Peoples, Part 2: Gandharan Art, ed. C. Fröhlich, The British Association for South Asian Studies, (Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of the European Association of South Asian Archaeologists in London 2005) 73-83

Manjul SK and Arvin Manjul, 2012, Composite Copper anthropomorphs Figure from Haryana: A Re-appraisal. In Proceedings of Indian Art History Congress XX Session, 2011, Patna, pp. 14-19.

  1. Kalyanaraman Sarasvati Research Center July 29, 2016

________________________________________

 

Some images from Copper Hoard Culture and related sites

From Lothal was reported a fragmentary Type 1 anthropomorph (13.0 pres. X 12.8 pres. X c. 0.08 cm, Cu 97.27%, Pb 2.51% (Rao).

 

[quote] Deo Prakash Sharma published a work called Newly Discovered

Carlos Aramayo notes: [quote]Copper Hoard, Weapons of South Asia, Delhi, 2002 in which he establishes a time between 2800 and 1500 BC for copper hoards based on analysis of copper implemets in the National Museum, New Delhi: “Till today around 5031 copper hoard implements have been reported from 197 sites mostly from Gangetic plains among which 193 are in National Museum collection. We have fixed date of copper hoards from circa 2800 to 1500 B.C. and these could be divided into two groups as follows (A) North Eastern Indian (B) Ganga-Yamuna doab and Western India. The technology of western group B is of a distinctive and advanced type and is influenced by the Harappans…The anthropomorphic figure of copper hoard is a cult object and a symbol of good omen. The lugged shouldered axes and weed chisels are a new type in copper hoard implements. The   shouldered axes show their origin from South East Asia via North-East India and Middle Ganga plain. The copper hoard implements and OCP ceramic are present in stratified deposits of Ganeshwar, Jodhpura, Mithathal, Madarpur, Saipai and Khatoli…Copper hoard implements of western group show genetic relationship with Harappans” (Deo Prakash Sharma 2002). [unquote]]

http://www.indiadivine.org/content/topic/1111496-earlier-dates-for-copper-hoard-culture-confirmed-at-sinauli-village-of-up

 

 

 

S. Kalyanaraman

Sarasvati Research Center January 2, 2017

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