More on Indus script
Submitted on 2012/11/23 at 6:13 pm
INDUS SCRIPT WAS TRUE WRITING
Please find my two papers below and circulate amongst the skeptics, particularly!
To state the obvious, the Indus script was a logo-syllabic script and a lost corpus did exist.
© Sujay Rao Mandavilli1
The reconfirmation and reinforcement of theIndus script thesis: A logical assessment andinquiry as to the elusive and enigmatic nature of this script
Sujay Rao Mandavilli
Published in the ICFAI Journal of History and Culture, January 2011
The earliest known example of an Indus seal dates to 1873 in the form of a drawingpublished by Alexander Cunningham. Since then, thousands of examples of the Indus script havebeen discovered, and the Indus script has been subject to very serious analysis by many scholarsfrom all over the world and still continues to fascinate, enchant and frustrate innumerableresearchers who have made many a vain attempt to understand itstrue nature and meaning. Thenature of the Indus script remains elusive and there are currently many different schools of thought –some think it represented a Dravidian language, some think it represented an Indo-Aryan language, while some are convinced it belongs to a third language group. Some argue thatit represented a languagewhile others argue it was only a complex ‘symbol system’, either with or without a linguistic content.In an earlier paper, ‘Syncretism and Acculturation in Ancient India; Anew Nine Phase Acculturation model explaining the process of transfer of power from theHarappans to the Indo-Aryans’, which was published in two parts in the ICFAI Journal of Historyand Culture (January 2009 and 2010), we proposed methods to reconstruct the languages of theHarappans with ‘smoking guns’, and concluded that the Harappans spoke neither a Dravidianlanguage nor Sanskrit but were intensely multi-linguistic and spoke several languages whichincluded remote ancestors of languages which much later came to be known as Prakrits. In thispaper, we take a parsimonious approach with regard to the Indus script, attempt to understand itsnature, examine the logical flaws of current theories with regard to the Indus script and concludethat it is impossible to draw any hasty conclusions about the nature of the Indus script withoutbuilding rock solid theoretical models and that the Indus script issue is probably less simple thanthe most simplistic of theories make it out to be. More importantly, we also refute ‘Sproat’ssmoking gun’ which cannot prove that the Indus writing system was not stable, that is was not awriting system or that it did not have a linguistic component. We will conclude, that all thingsconsidered, further research is only likely to reinforce the idea that it was a logo-syllabic scriptand that any other scenario is highly unlikely