Dr Asko Parpola, the Indologist from Finland, is Professor Emeritus of Indology, Institute of World Cultures,
University of Helsinki, and one of the leading
authorities on the Indus Civilisation and its script. On the basis of sustained
work on the Indus script, he has concluded
that the script—which is yet to be deciphered—encodes a Dravidian language. As
a Sanskritist, his fields of specialisation include the Sama Veda and Vedic
rituals. Excerpts from replies that Professor Parpola gave over e-mail to a set
of questions sent to him by TS Subramanian in the context of his being chosen
for the Kalaignar M Karunanidhi Classical Tamil Award, 2009. The award,
comprising Rs 10 lakh and a citation, will be presented during the World
Classical Tamil Conference to be held in Coimbatore
from June 23 to 27, 2010. The award announcement said Professor Parpola was
chosen for his work on the Dravidian hypothesis in interpreting the Indus script because the Dravidian, as described by him,
was close to old Tamil. The award, administered by the Central Institute of
Classical Tamil, Chennai, was instituted out of a donation of Rs 1 crore made
by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi.
You are a
Vedic scholar. What brought you to the field of the Indus
script?
As a university student of Sanskrit and ancient Greek
in the early 1960s, I read John Chadwick's fascinating book on how the
Mycenaean ‘Linear B' script of Bronze Age Greece was deciphered [The Decipherment of Linear B, Cambridge
University Press, 1958]. Michael Ventris succeeded in doing this without the
aid of any bilingual texts, which in most cases have opened up forgotten
scripts. Then my childhood friend Seppo Koskenniemi, who worked for IBM,
offered his help if I wanted to use the computer for some task in my field. As
statistics and various indexes have been important in successful decipherments,
we took up this challenging problem of Indian antiquity.
There is some
criticism that the Indus script is not a
writing system.
I do not agree [with that]. All those features of the Indus script which have been mentioned as proof for its
not being a writing system, characterise also the Egyptian hieroglyphic script
during its first 600 years of existence. For detailed counterarguments, see my
papers at the website www.harappa.com .
If it is a
writing system, what reasons do you adduce for it?
The script is highly standardised; the signs are as a
rule written in regular lines; there are hundreds of sign sequences which recur
in the same order, often at many different sites; the preserved texts are
mostly seal stones, and seals in other cultures usually have writing recording
the name or title of the seal owner; and the Indus people were acquainted with
cuneiform writing through their trade contacts with Mesopotamia.
Indus signs are generally available on seals and tablets. It
was presumed that the seals and tablets had short Indus
texts because they were meant for trade and commerce. However, a 3-metre long
inscription on wood inlaid with stone crystals was found at Dholavira in Gujarat. It was also presumed that Indus
inscriptions would not be available in stone. Again, in Dholavira, a large slab
with three big Indus signs was found recently.
The Archaeological Survey of India's website says the Dholavira site “enjoys
the unique distinction of yielding an inscription made up of ten large-sized
signs of the Indus script and, not less in
importance, is the other find of a large slab engraved with three large signs.”
What, in your assessment, is the significance of Indus
signs engraved on a large stone slab?
These finds show that the Indus
script was used in monumental inscriptions too. It is natural to expect writing
to be used in such contexts as well.
What are the
impediments to deciphering the Indus script?
Is the short nature of the texts a big impediment? If we get a text with about
70 signs, will we able to decipher the script?
The main impediment is the absence of such a key as the
Rosetta stone, which contained the same text in different scripts and
languages. Nor is there any closely similar known script of the same origin
which could give clues to the sound values of the Indus
signs. And not only is the script unknown, there is much controversy also about
its type (alphabetic, syllabic, logo-syllabic) and about the language
underlying it. Apart from the likelihood that the Greater Indus Valley was
probably called Meluhha in Sumerian, there is no historical information
concerning the Indus Civilisation: it was the names and genealogies of the
Persian kings (known from Greek historians and the Bible) which opened up the
cuneiform script. The texts are so short that they hardly contain complete
sentences, probably only noun phrases. But a text some 70 signs long would not
lead to a dramatic decipherment of the script, although it can be expected to
throw some new light on the structure of the underlying language.
Can you
explain what you mean by the “Dravidian solution of the Indus
enigma?”
I mean by it obtaining certainty that the language
underlying the Indus script in South Asia
belongs to the Dravidian language family. For this, it is not necessary to
decipher the entire script (which in any case is impossible with the present
materials) but we need a sufficient number of tightly cross-checked sign
interpretations.
It is 16
years since you published Deciphering the Indus
Script. What is the progress you have made since then in deciphering it?
Some progress has been made, and I shall talk about it
at the Classical Tamil Conference in June. Progress is very difficult, however,
also because our knowledge of Proto-Dravidian vocabulary and especially
phraseology is so incomplete. This knowledge is critical for reliable readings,
and here Old Tamil offers precious but unfortunately limited material.
Some Indian
scholars feel that the Indus Civilisation is
Aryan and connected with the Rig Veda. You are a Vedic scholar and you
specialise in the Indus script too. So what is
your reaction to this standpoint?
Rigvedic hymns often speak of horses and horse-drawn
chariots, and the horse sacrifice, ashvamedha,
is among the most prestigious Vedic rites. The only wild equid native to the
Indian subcontinent is the wild ass, which is known from the bone finds of the
Indus Civilisation and depicted (though rarely) in its art and script. The
domesticated horse is absent from South Asia
until the second millennium BCE. Finds from Pirak and Swat from 1600 BCE show
it was introduced from Central Asia after the
Indus Civilisation. The earliest archaeological finds of horse-drawn chariot come
from graves dated to around 2000 BCE in the Eurasian steppes, the natural
habitat of the horse. There are also ancient Aryan loanwords in Finno-Ugric
languages spoken in northeastern Europe (for
example, the word for ‘hundred' in my own language Finnish is sata). Some of these Aryan loanwords
represent a more archaic stage of development (that is, are phonetically closer
to the older Proto-Indo-European language) than Rigvedic Sanskrit. It is very
likely that these words came to Finno-Ugric languages from Proto-Aryan spoken
in the Volga steppes.
You have
published two volumes of Indus Seals and
Inscriptions along with JP Joshi. Will there be a third volume?
Shri JP Joshi was the co-editor of the first volume of
the Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions, S. G. M. Shah of the second. Volume
3, Part 1 is in the press and will come out by June 2010.
Tamil-Brahmi
inscriptions dating back to 1st century BCE to third century CE offer the
fundamental evidence that Tamil is a classical language. Would you like to
comment on the threat posed to these Tamil-Brahmi inscriptions in the hills in
and around Madurai
by the granite-quarrying lobby?
The Tamil-Brahmi inscriptions are important monuments,
which should be adequately protected. The possibility of new finds must also
not be forgotten. In my own country, Finland, the government has been
much concerned about the damage caused to scenery by sand-quarrying and has
passed restrictive laws.
CHENNAI: An inscription on stone, with three big Indus signs and possibly a fourth, has been found on the Harappan site of Dholavira in Gujarat.
The discovery is significant because this is the first time that the Indus script has been found engraved on a natural stone in the Indus Valley. The Indus script has so far been found on seals made of steatite, terracotta tablets, ceramics and so on. Dholavira also enjoys the distinction of yielding a spectacularly large Indus script with 10 big signs on wood. This inscription was three-metre long.
Both the discoveries were made by a team led by RS Bisht, who retired as Joint Director-General of the Archaeological Survey of India in 2004. While the stone inscription was discovered in 1999, the script with 10 large signs was found in 1991.
“The inscription on stone is unique because it is the first of its kind [in the Indus civilisation area]. It is the first inscription on a stone slab. But only part of it was found,” said Dr Bisht, who led 14 field excavation seasons at Dholavira from 1989 to 2001. “It was a natural limy sandstone cut into shape and then engraved with an inscription,” he said.
The signs are seven cm tall and 6-10 cm wide.
The script has three large Indus signs, running from right to left, and there appears to be a fourth sign too. Dr Bisht said: “The inscription must have run longer, but the stone was broken into pieces. The stone was used as ordinary building material for making an underground chamber in the bailey area of the citadel during stage five of the seven stages documenting the rise and fall of the Indus civilisation at Dholavira. It was placed in such a manner that it was facing us when we found it.”
He was sure that there must be more stone pieces with the Indus script there. He surmised that the stone with the script must have been used as a lintel of the doorway of the underground chamber so that people could notice it. The inscription could have stood for the name of the house, its owner or an incantation. “It is a closed book,” he said. (The Indus script has not been deciphered yet).
Michel Danino, independent researcher in the Harappan civilisation, called it “an unprecedented discovery because there is no stone inscription in the Indus civilisation.” Stone was a rare material on the Indus plains. “This is the first time we have come across a stone inscription, but it has not attracted the attention it deserves,” Mr. Danino said.
Dholavira in Kachch district is a major Indus site. It attracted wide attention in the 1990s for yielding what Dr Bisht calls “a spectacularly large inscription made of 10 unusually big Indus signs” which were inlaid on a wooden board which had, however, decayed. The signs were made of thoroughly baked gypsum. It must have been sported right above the north gate of the castle, and “it must have been visible from afar with its white brilliance,” Dr Bisht said.
Highly literate society
He argued that it was a highly literate Harappan society that must have existed at Dholavira because seals, tablets, pottery, bangles and even copper tools with Indus signs were found everywhere in the citadel, the middle town, the lower town and the annexe of the site.
Besides, the same seals, beads, pottery and ornaments were found everywhere as if the entire population had wealth. “It appears to have been an egalitarian society. On the basis of material culture, you cannot draw a distinction among the city's inhabitants,” he said.
Re: Re: Deciphering the Indus Script: challenges and some headway—A new discovery in Gujarat
by
Sujay Rao Mandavilli
on Fri 07 May 2010 05:02 PM IST | Permanent Link
Even if a small linguistic component is added – rebus principle or punning (Witzel Kyoto, 2009 or Sproat in his presentations) or acriphony is added, it qualifies for full literacy. I assume some ’sound coding’ would have been useful to them atleast on some occasions.. the longest seal is 17 characters non-analomous and 26 characters analomous. I have never said that what Farmer is saying is necessarily fully wrong, but even Parpola has been reading them mostly as logograms with a linguistic component. So how much of what Farmer is saying is new apart from the fact that he popularized the idea? These men have been saying almost the same thing and fighting with each other?Till 2900 BC Egypt and Mesopotamia were considered proto-literate even if their texts are shorter(not non-literate!!!!)- even if there is small difference between the 2 maybe the Indus system was more expressive than Egyptian proto-literate- because conditional entropy, order of signs, combinations probably did play a major role in meaning in the Indus script (Korvink). ????Terminologies pertaining to literacy cannot be changed unless all scholars agree – and any demands to change terminology must be met with suspicion, naturally. Only a very small portion of the IVC has been excavated, you know, 5% maybe! Even Farmer agrees “Judging from modern examples and research in the linguistic history of South Asia, the Indus Valley was probably intensely multi linguistic throughout its history. This may have provided the Indus emblem system with an advantage over ordinary writing as a means of providing the civilization with social cohesion. The fact that the majority of inscriptions rely on a surprisingly small core of symbols suggests that the meaning of Indus signs could have potentially been known by almost or all (ALL!!) of the population, resulting in a pervasive quasiliteracy far beyond that achieved in Mesopotamia or Egypt.” No other civlization mass produced writing or (”writing”!!). Where else did they have public signboards then apart from the Indus?
I can instead cite Farmer and declare it the most literate civilization on erth. And he and I could be saying the same thing. I say such terms must be avoided. if they had learned how to use the rebus principle , they would have used it whenever the need arose. Seal writing is always short . Sproat’s smoking gun cannot be used to test the stability or the complexity of the system. It has weaknesses. It cannot also be used to prove that the Indus script didn’t have a linguistic component.
The Harappans had the oldest “signboard” in the world, apparently. They mass produced writing (or “writing”) . According to Parpola, 1/10th of
Mohendodaro (100 square metres) has yielded 2100 seals (with 9000 characters?). Or more than one character per person. I declare the Indus the most literate civilization on earth as every body could ‘read and write’ – Farmer.
This makes the debate so shallow it is nearly ridiculous. After all what then is the difference beteween the Indus and civilizations which did not yield any trace of writing? History is a subject after all and is taught everywhere in the world. Don’t mislead people deliberately and try to deceive them! We hate those who misrepresent history.
please find the article below. My comment is at the end.
Re: Re: Re: Deciphering the Indus Script: challenges and some headway—A new discovery in Gujarat
by
Sujay Rao Mandavilli
on Fri 07 May 2010 05:15 PM IST | Permanent Link
Here is my complete , comprehensive solution to the so-called Aryan problem
Part one is a high level overview. Part two is much more interesting
This is one of the longest research papers published in a peer-reviewed journal since independance.
Part 2 is particularly important
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/27103044/Sujay-NPAP-Part-One
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/27105677/Sujay-Npap-Part-Two
> Mirror:
> http://www.docstoc.com/docs/25880426/Sujay-NPAP-Part-One
> http://www.docstoc.com/docs/25865304/SUJAY-NPAP-Part-Two
Links to the journal
Part one http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1324506
Part Two http://ssrn.com/abstract=1541822
methods to reconstruct the languages of the Harappans with checks and balances
The Hindu adds
In the recent interview with Asko Parpola published in The Hindu (April 15, 2010), readers were made aware of the lasting contributions by Professor Parpola to Indological studies, especially in the field of the Indus Civilisation and its script. Having known him personally for four decades and having closely watched his great contribution to the study of the Indus script, I am in a position to amplify the information provided in the interview.
Professor Parpola's contributions to Harappan studies are truly monumental, and these are not confined merely to the study of the Indus script. He has published a long series of brilliant papers to establish the fact of Aryan immigration into South Asia after the decline of the Indus Civilisation. As a Vedic scholar-turned-Dravidianist, he has the best academic credentials to prove that the Indus Civilisation was pre-Aryan and that its writing encoded a Dravidian language. In addition to his linguistic skills and deep scholarship of Vedic Sanskrit and the Dravidian languages, he has harnessed the computer in one of the earliest scientific attempts to study the structure of the Indus texts through computational linguistic procedures. Professor Parpola has produced the first truly scientific concordance to the Indus inscriptions. His concordance is accurate and exhaustive and has become an indispensable tool for researchers in the field.
Equally impressive, and again truly monumental, are the publications inspired and co-authored by Professor Parpola, of two volumes of the Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions. These volumes reproduce in amazing clarity and detail all the Indus seals (and their newly-made impressions) and other inscriptions. I happen to know personally the enormous difficulties Professor Parpola faced in publishing these volumes, nudging and goading the slow-moving bureaucracy in India and Pakistan to make available the originals, most of which were photographed again by the expert whom Professor Parpola sent from Finland for the purpose.
He published his magnum opus in 1994, Deciphering the Indus Script. The book contains the best exposition of the Dravidian hypothesis relating to the Indus Civilisation and its writing. Even though the Indus script remains undeciphered, as Professor Parpola readily admits, his theoretical groundwork on the Dravidian character of the Indus Civilisation and the script, and the fact of Aryan immigration into India after the decline of the Indus Civilisation, have been accepted by most scholars in the world.
Most of the Early Dravidian speakers of North and Central India switched over to the dominant Indo-Aryan languages in Post-Harappan times. Speakers of Aryan languages have indistinguishably merged with speakers of Dravidian and Munda languages millennia ago, creating a composite Indian society containing elements inherited from every source. It is thus likely that the Indus art, religious motifs and craft editions survived and can be traced in Sanskrit literature from the days of the Rigveda, and also in Old Tamil traditions recorded in the Sangam poems. Professor Parpola is aware of the Harappan heritage of both Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages, the former culturally and the latter linguistically. His profound scholarship in both families of languages enables him to mine the Indian cultural heritage holistically in his search for clues to solve the mysteries of the Indus script.
It may be asked: What has Tamil to do with the Indus script that Professor Parpola should be honoured with the inaugural Classical Tamil Award? Tamil happens to be the oldest and the best-documented Dravidian language. It is mainly for this reason that the Dravidian Etymological Dictionary of Burrow and Emeneau accords the head position to Tamil entries in the dictionary. That this distinction is well-deserved is also proved by the fact that Old Tamil contains the most archaic features of Dravidian phonology and morphology, like for example, the retention of the character aytam and the sound zh. Dravidian linguists have also established that most proto-Dravidian reconstructions are in close accord with words in Old Tamil. The earliest Tamil inscriptions date from the Mauryan Era. The earliest Tamil literature, the Sangam works, are from the early centuries of the Common Era, but record oral traditions from a much earlier time. It is for this reason that Professor Parpola and other Dravidian researchers consider Old Tamil to be a possible route to get at the language of the Indus inscriptions.
Professor Parpola speaks for himself in the following excerpt from his message of acceptance of the Classical Tamil Award. He says: “When the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu's award is given to me for a Dravidian solution of the Indus enigma, this award will inevitably be interpreted by many people as politically motivated. Nevertheless, I am ready to fight for the truth, and in my opinion, the Tamils are entitled to some pride for having preserved so well the linguistic heritage of the Indus Civilisation. At the same time, it must not be forgotten that though their language has shifted in the course of millennia, people of North India too are to a large extent descended from the Harappan people, and have also preserved cultural heritage of the same civilisation.”