Seal H96 with inscription: CAGED TRI-FORK & VEE IN DIAMOND / POT // STRIPED FAT LEG LAMBDA. |
Detail from seal M894 with inscription: VEE IN DIAMOND / STRIPED FAT LEG LAMBDA / DOT IN FISH / SPEAR // STRIPED HORN / MALLET / SKEWERED CHEVRON / CIRCLE. |
The second symbol is STRIPED HORN (XIII 16). In Koskenniemi and Parpola’s list, the HORN
has a single stripe (KP210), while it has four stripes in Fairservis’ list
(D-5). Wells notes four variants which
occur a total of 15 times, four from Mohenjo daro (including M-196, the only
variant comprising 13 strokes), four from Harappa, three from Kalibangan, two
from Nausharo, and one each from Lothal and Chanhujo daro. Fairservis identifies this symbol as a tusk,
probably of a rhinoceros, an animal that occurs as the iconic element on some
seals. Nevertheless, he suggests the
definition “horn” and “bull”!
Analogs to Indus sign XIII 16 in proto-cuneiform, including IR (variants "a" and "b," top); |NI~b x 4(N57)|, a measure of capacity (below left); and SZITA @ g~b, "sacred vessel" (below right). |
In proto-cuneiform there are signs of roughly triangular
form, with stripes. These parallels to
the Indus sign include IR, which came to mean “fragrance” (variant “a”
containing diagonal stripes, “d” containing verticals); as well as |NI~b x
4(N57)|, evidently a measure of capacity; and SZITA @ g~b, perhaps originally a
sacred vessel of some kind. None of
these, however, has the asymmetrical form of the Indus sign.
Egyptian hieroglyphs F16 (top left) and F13 (top right), bull horns; and Luwian hieroglyphs la (below left) and su (below right). |
Luwian hieroglyphs include two analogs. One of these is an asymmetrically triangular
syllabic symbol, la, which may
contain two stripes. The other is sú, apparently a depiction of a horn. Similarly, Egyptian makes use of a single
bull’s horn as F16, ideographic or a determinative in words for “horn” (db, hnt, and ‘b being three synonyms).
Both horns together form another glyph, F13, an ideograph in wpt, “brow; beginning,” as well as a
phonetic triliteral representing those three consonants.
Ghanaian goldweight bearing the motif sometimes termed the "ram's horn" (Phillips 2010: 28, Pl. 25). |
In West Africa, one of the more popular symbols found on
goldweights is a coil termed the “ram’s horn” (Phillips 2010: 28, Pl. 25). It may represent a stylized horn, or the
similarity may be nothing more than coincidence.
The following Indus sign is SQUARE FAT CHEVRON (XIII
17). It is distinguished from XII 32 of
the same name by the square ends.
Elsewhere, it has been enumerated KP195, W421, and Fs K-2. Fairservis identifies it as a depiction of a
measuring device, yielding the definition “measure” (of cloth). Wells notes four occurrences of this
variation on the motif, with two each from Mohenjo daro and Harappa.
Proto-cuneiform signs ERIN, "cedar tree/wood" (top) and LA, "abundance" (bottom). |
Parallels appear in proto-cuneiform with ERIN, “cedar tree
or wood,” TUN~b, “pocket, pouch,” and LA~e, “abundance.” The first two resemble the letter “L” with a
longer base than vertical portion, differing in the relative height of the
vertical. The last of the three is more
like the left half of “T,” with the longer portion at the top. The arrangement of stripes also differ among
these.
Next, we find FOOTED STOOL WITH HAIRY LEGS AND ATTACHED E
TRI-FORK (XIII 18), also known as KP238, W461, and Fs F-14. Fairservis sees this as a ligature of I-11,
the STOOL, defined as “tongs,” plus the affixed F-13, the TRI-FORK, defined as “fire.” Somehow these join together to suggest “storm”
to this author. Wells finds this symbol
to be a singleton from Mohenjo daro (M-107).
I see a total of 10 of which three come from Harappa. Some have two “hairs” on each “leg” of the “stool,”
yielding a different stroke count from the others, which have three “hairs” on
each “leg.” It may be significant that
this symbol appears as the whole inscription on one seal (M-842).
Heavily abraded seal M-1133 with (partial?) inscription: MAN HOLDING POST / COMB / POT // STRIPED TOP WITH BENT LEGS / TRIPLE TRIANGLES. |
The nineteenth of the 13-stroke symbols is STRIPED TOP WITH
BENT LEGS (XIII 19), a symbol listed elsewhere as KP275 (in rather different
form) and W488. Wells indicates that it
is another singleton from Mohenjo daro (M-1133). It is possible that it was intended simply as
a striped and skewered “top.” The
additional stroke beneath the rectangle could be an error/correction.
Proto-cuneiform signs NIMGIR, "night watchman" and SIG4, "mud brick." |
In any case, there is a vague resemblance to the
proto-cuneiform sign SIG4. This symbol
came to mean “mud brick” despite the fact that it does not resemble a brick in
the least.
Proposed Indus sign QUOTE UNDER BEARER (XIII 20) as it might appear over the unicorn. |
Our next sign is a problem: QUOTE UNDER BEARER (XIII
20). It is listed by Koskenniemi and
Parpola (KP2). It is missing from
Fairservis’ list, though this is not surprising since he lists only a few
ligatures. But it does not occur in the otherwise
more detailed list prepared by Wells, either.
I have not found it in the first two volumes of the Corpus. Perhaps it occurs in
the third volume, which I have yet to see.
Seal M-222 with inscription: PRAWN / COW LEG / HEADLESS FLYING BIRD. |
The twenty-first sign drawn with 13 strokes is peculiar in
form: HEADLESS FLYING BIRD (XIII 21), also designated KP65, W150, and Fs C-4a
&b. Fairservis seems uncertain of
the identification of this rare sign, indicating “a” to represent a bee with
the meaning “honey,” while “b” is a flying fish, meaning “beauty; dance”! The “wings” do not resemble insect wings,
whether those of a bee or not. To me,
they most closely resemble the wings of a plucked chicken. The lack of a clearly defined head might go
along with such an identification, but the “tail” seems to remain, taking the
form of an inverted trident. Whatever
this odd sign represents, it appears just four times, as Wells observes, three
times at Mohenjo daro and once at Harappa.
If the Indus sign does depict a dead bird, with plucked
wings outstretched, we can compare the Egyptian glyph G54. This depicts a “trussed” goose or duck
(Gardiner 1976: 473). As such, it is the
determinative in wšn, “wring the neck
of (birds); offer.”
Detail of seal L-112 with inscription: MALLET / BOWTIE / BI-QUOTES // STRIPED DOOR WITH KNOB / BI-FORK TOPPED POT / POT (original is heavily scratched and hard to discern). |
The following sign could be a variation on the LAMBDA, but I
term it STRIPED DOOR WITH KNOB because of the verticality of the longer segment
(XIII 22). In published lists, it is
designated KP200, W519, and Fs G-22.
Fairservis sees it as a stairway for reasons I do not understand,
defining it as “heap, accumulation of a commodity.” Wells finds only two occurrences, both from
Mohenjo daro. I think there may be more,
including one from Lothal (L-112) and three or so from Harappa (H287, H879-882,
H973).
Proto-cuneiform sign ZATU 781, of unknown meaning. |
Proto-cuneiform provides a very close parallel with the
unfortunately undefinable ZATU 781.
This, too, includes a thin, tall rectangle with stripes, as well as a
shorter segment attached. The shorter
portion attaches at right angles in proto-cuneiform, though, whereas the
analogous element of the Indus sign attaches at an oblique angle.
Seal K-1 with inscription: TWO POSTS / BLANKET WITH 6 TICKS / STRIPED TRIANGLE UNDER TABLE / SINGLE POST (note that the long "legs" of the "table" are formed of two continuous lines, not dots). |
Our next to last sign is problematic, again: CAGED STRIPED
TRIANGLE UNDER TABLE (XIII 23), found only as KP212 elsewhere. While there are four occurrences of a striped
triangle under the bracket-like “table,” I see none that including the four
separate marks termed “caging” here.
Perhaps Koskenniemi and Parpola interpret one of the long-legged “tables”
as being made up of dots rather than being continuous lines.
Proposed Indus sign XIII 24 as it might appear over the horns of a zebu. |
Fasscinating analysis, Diwiyana.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you call it '13-stroke-sign'? How to count the 13 strokes?
Regards. Kalyan97@gmail.com
I like this information Thanks for sharing this. I would like to these articles and I have confusion but I read your news and I easy understood
ReplyDeleteBuyback your old diamond ring
I like this information Thanks for sharing this. I would like to these articles and I have confusion but I read your news and I easy understood
ReplyDeleteFloral solitaire earrings