 |
| Tablet H-1319, sides A & B, showing the ligature EX UNDER CHEVRON. |
This post continues the discussion of ligatures in Indus
script. To briefly recap, one hypothesis
concerning such complex signs is that a ligature is simply the sum of its
parts. Thus, the sign EX UNDER CHEVRON
is graphically composed of two simpler signs, EX and CHEVRON. The hypothesis is that EX UNDER CHEVRON also
means the same thing as EX and CHEVRON in sequence. The ligature (as in H-1319), then, would be an abbreviation of the sequence (as in H-1367 -- though note the unusually large space between the last two signs). This certainly describes the significance and
function of some ligatures in another ancient script, namely Egyptian
hieroglyphs. But even in ancient
Egyptian, not all ligatures can be interpreted in such a straightforward
manner. In other scripts, such as
Chinese, ligatures cannot be interpreted as the sum of their parts. To test whether Indus ligatures are indeed
the sum of their parts, I have examined the sequences of these parts to see whether
they occur in the same contexts as the ligatures.
 |
| Graffiti on pot shard H-1367 with inscription (right to left): CEE / THREE QUOTES / CHEVRON / EX. |
In my first post on this topic I noted that POT BEARER
appears to be the graphic combination of POT + BEARER. The sequence POT + BEARER does occasionally
occur in inscriptions as a terminal sequence, just as POT BEARER occurs as a
terminal sign. This supports the
hypothesis. But evidence for
combinations of POT and an apparent numeral (from one to four “quotes”) does
not support the hypothesis. There is no
sequence of “numeral” + POT for comparison with the ligatures. Further, POT is a terminal, whereas POTTED
ONE, POTTED 2, POTTED 3, and POTTED 4 are medial signs.
 |
| Seal M-415 with inscription: CIRCLED DOT / PRAWN WITH ATTACHED POST. |
In Part 2, I noted that evidence on ligatures of CHEVRON and
one of seven different signs is mixed, with three sequences possibly supporting
the hypothesis but the absence of four others not supporting it. I also examined eleven ligatures with FORK. Of these, three are not supported by a
matching sequence. Evidence concerning
FORK thus tends to support the hypothesis but not unequivocally.
I turn now to SINGLE POST, another sign that occurs in in a
number of ligatures: besides MAN HOLDING POST and CAGED MAN HOLDING POST, the
“post” is attached to PRAWN (as in M-415), FIGURE EIGHT, RECTANGLE, GRID, BED, and FORK TOPPED
POT. Graphically, these ligatures differ
from sequences only in the presence of a short diagonal line connecting the two
elements of the ligature. Thus, the
proposed purpose of ligatures as abbreviations does not make sense here. SINGLE POST does not occur adjacent to MAN although
it precedes other anthropomorphs. Nor
does it precede PRAWN, FIGURE EIGHT, RECTANGLE, GRID, or BED. The only sequence that matches a ligature is
SINGLE POST + FORK TOPPED POT with two (possibly three) occurrences (K-40, KP
1385 and KP 2785). This evidence is
summed up in Table 1.
|
Sign A
|
Sign B
|
Ligature AB
|
Sequence A + B
|
Sequence B + A
|
|
POST
|
MAN
|
MAN HOLDING POST
|
--
|
--
|
|
POST
|
PRAWN
|
PRAWN W/ ATT. POST
|
--
|
--
|
|
POST
|
FIGURE EIGHT
|
FIGURE 8 W/ ATT. POST
|
--
|
--
|
|
POST
|
RECTANGLE
|
RECTANGLE W/ ATT. POST
|
--
|
--
|
|
POST
|
GRID
|
GRID W/ ATT. POST
|
--
|
--
|
|
POST
|
BED
|
BED W/ ATT. POST
|
--
|
--
|
|
POST
|
FORK TOPPED POT
|
FORK TOPPED POT W/ ATT. POST
|
SINGLE POST + FORK TOPPED POT (3)
|
--
|
Table 1. Ligatures with SINGLE POST
compared to sequences containing POST.
There are a few other ligatures not yet discussed. Some have a small, chevron-like attachment I
have termed an EAR: CIRCLED QUADRANGLE, CIRCLED DOT, DOUBLE CEES/DOUBLE ESSES, two variations on
CEE, BOXED BI-RAKE, FISH BETWEEN PARENS, and MAN. The “ear” on the anthropomorph differs in
size and shape from the others and is probably not the same appendage. In two cases, the component bearing
the ear is not an independent sign; i.e., there is no FISH BETWEEN PARENS
or BOXED BI-RAKE without the "ear." In all of these
cases, it is hard to say which independent sign the EAR is to be identified
with – if any. This prevents further analysis.
 |
| Seal H-5 with inscription showing CEE WITH EAR as the first sign. |
A similar situation exists for the TABLE. In its independent form, the two “legs” are
of unequal length but both are relatively long compared to the TABLE in most
ligatures. Thus, the independent sign and the element in ligatures may not be the same. Assuming for the moment that they are the same element, I note the TABLE in ligatures
above STACKED NINE, DEE WITH LASHES, EN, STRIPED TRIANGLE, CAGED STRIPED
TRIANGLE, STRIPED TRIANGLE UNDER DOUBLE TABLES, SPACESHIP, EX, ASTERISK, RECTANGLE
EXIT, SQUARE AY, and PAW. None of these
ligatures is common. For example, one of the more frequent ones, EX UNDER TABLE, occurs only 15 times. When considering sequences involving TABLE, the second element in these ligatures is often rare. The EX has just 14 occurrences. EN may not even be an independent sign unless
it is a variation of ZIGZAG (it may occur on H-1676). Not surprisingly
then, in most cases there is no sequence to compare with the ligature.
|
Sign A
|
Sign B
|
Ligature AB
|
Sequence A + B
|
Sequence B + A
|
|
TABLE
|
STACKED NINE
|
STACKED NINE UNDER TABLE
|
--
|
--
|
|
TABLE
|
DEE WITH LASHES
|
DEE WITH LASHES UNDER TABLE
|
--
|
--
|
|
TABLE
|
EN (ZIGZAG?)
|
EN UNDER TABLE
|
--
|
--
|
|
TABLE
|
STRIPED TRIANGLE
|
STRIPED TRIANGLE UNDER TABLE
|
--
|
--
|
|
TABLE
|
SPACESHIP
|
SPACESHIP UNDER TABLE
|
--
|
SPACESHIP + TABLE (2)
|
|
TABLE
|
EX
|
EX UNDER TABLE
|
--
|
--
|
|
TABLE
|
ASTERISK
|
ASTERISK UNDER TABLE
|
--
|
--
|
|
TABLE
|
RECTANGLE EXIT
|
RECTANGLE EXIT UNDER TABLE
|
--
|
--
|
|
TABLE
|
SQUARE AY
|
SQUARE AY UNDER TABLE
|
--
|
--
|
|
TABLE
|
PAW
|
PAW UNDER TABLE
|
--
|
--
|
|
TABLE
|
SINGLE QUOTE
|
QUOTE UNDER TABLE / TABLE WITH SLASH
|
TABLE + SINGLE QUOTE (4)
|
--
|
Table 2. Ligatures with SINGLE POST
compared to sequences containing POST.
In one case, that of STRIPED TRIANGLE (or its STRIPED HORN
variant), the second element is common enough, with 68 occurrences. However, this sign never occurs in sequence
with the independent TABLE. In contrast,
there are 33 inscriptions containing SPACESHIP, in two of which it appears
alongside TABLE. This compares favorably with SPACESHIP UNDER
TABLE. Likewise, there are four
inscriptions containing the sequence TABLE + SINGLE QUOTE. This compares favorably with QUOTE UNDER TABLE (and this ligature contains the long-legged version of the TABLE). With so little data, any conclusions are
highly provisional. Even so, evidence
that ligatures are to be interpreted as abbreviated sequences is not strong.
 |
| Inscription from M-34 showing the sequence BUD + SKEWERED DONUT + FORK (above) before BI-QUOTES; impression of seal M-1759 showing the ligature BUD, SKEWERED DONUT, FORK TOPPED DUBYA (below). |
There are a number of rare ligatures yet to be discussed. Compare the sequence BUD / SKEWERED DONUT / FORK / BI-QUOTES / HAIRY HUNCHBACK / STRIPED
VEST / POT (M-34) with the ligatures
FORK & BUD TOPPED POT, and
especially FORK, SKEWERED DONUT, &
BUD TOPPED POT (M-1759 in KP
1982: 70). Note that both the sequence
and the comparable ligature precede BI-QUOTES.
This supports the hypothesis that the ligature is equivalent to the
sequence. However, the various signs
that I term DUBYA (topped with SHISH KEBAB or BUD) do not support the
hypothesis because neither BUD nor SHISH KEBAB occurs adjacent to CRAB. Thus, the ligature CRAB IN BUD TOPPED POT remains
unexplained. A comparison of various other ligatures and sequences of their components is summarized in Table 3 below.
|
Sign A
|
Sign B
|
Ligature AB
|
Sequence A + B
|
Sequence B + A
|
|
CRAB
|
TOPPED DUBYA
|
CRAB IN BUD TOPPED POT
|
--
|
--
|
|
BUD + SKEWERED DONUT
|
FORK
|
BUD, SKEWERED DONUT, FORK TOPPED DUBYA
|
BUD + SKEWERED DONUT + FORK
|
--
|
|
SQUARE / RECTANGLE
|
BI-RAKE
|
BOXED BI-RAKE WITH EAR
|
--
|
--
|
|
SQUARE / RECTANGLE
|
STACKED NINE
|
BOXED ODD STACKED 9 & VEE
|
--
|
--
|
|
DIAMOND
|
FAT LEG LAMBDA (?)
|
PENNANT IN DIAMOND
|
VEE IN DIAMOND + FAT LEG LAMBDA (17) (?)
|
--
|
|
DIAMOND
|
HAMMER
|
HAMMER IN DIAMOND
|
--
|
--
|
|
MALLET
|
FOOTED STOOL WITH MID EARS
|
FANCY STOOL IN MALLET
|
--
|
--
|
|
BLANKET
|
FOOTED STOOL WITH MID EARS
|
FANCY STOOL IN BLANKET
|
--
|
--
|
|
TRIPLE BRICK
|
CUP
|
CUP IN TRIPLE BRICK
|
--
|
--
|
Table 3. Comparison of various ligatures with sequences of components.
In most cases, there is no sequence to compare to the ligature. One possible exception concerns the PENNANT IN DIAMOND, in which the infrequent DIAMOND encloses a PENNANT which does not occur independently.
It is possible that the PENNANT element is a miniature version of
(STRIPED) FAT LEG LAMBDA. The latter
sign often follows VEE IN DIAMOND but never appears alongside the basic
DIAMOND. Conceivably, the ligature here could be a simplified version of both components, each changed by the necessity of fitting into a very small space.
 |
| Seal M-1087 with final STOOL WITH BENT FOOT + PINWHEEL. |
 |
| Detail from seal M-63 with final FOOTED STOOL WITH TICK + PINWHEEL. |
Finally, there is the question of minor modifications that
seem to make little or no difference, which I have sometimes termed the
addition of a TICK. The STOOL WITH BENT FOOT appears in 10 inscriptions, in 7 of which it precedes PINWHEEL; FOOTED STOOL appears 68 times, in 26 of which it precedes PINWHEEL; FOOTED STOOL WITH
TICK occurs 18 times, always preceding PINWHEEL. Despite the fact that these three signs are
visually distinct, they appear in the same contexts. This suggests these variations on the “stool”
theme are more closely related to each other than any is to the other
variations (FOOTED STOOL WITH MID POST, FOOTED STOOL WITH MID EARS, FOOTED
STOOL WITH HAIRY LEGS, etc.).
 |
| Broken seal M-244 with final FOOTED STOOL + PINWHEEL. |
Such a situation is found in another imperfectly understood
script. The Khitan Small Script was used
briefly in what is now northern China (southwest Manchuria) to write a language
related to Mongolian (Wu and Janhunen 2010: 13). This script resembles modern Chinese. In fact, a number of characters are borrowed
directly from Chinese while others are modifications. One very common modification of Khitan
characters is the addition of a single short stroke or dot (2010: 42-43). For example, the Chinese character da “big, great” (resembling the Indus MAN) is used in Khitan for
the syllable ud. The addition of a short stroke or “tick” to
the left “foot” – which changes the Chinese character to tai “too, very” – represents the Khitan syllable ung.
Besides indicating phonological differences, the dot can also sometimes
denote a grammatical distinction. For example, the Chinese character jiong “border, wasteland” (resembling an Indus TABLE with “legs” of equal length) is the Khitan “seventy”;
the addition of a dot beneath this “table” indicates masculine gender. But in all too many cases, the difference
between the two similar characters is simply obscure.
In conclusion, the evidence concerning ligatures in Indus script is mixed. There are some ligatures that occur in the same contexts as sequences of the same elements. But all too often this is not the case. Thus, it seems to me that there is insufficient evidence to support the hypothesis that a ligature AB is the sum of its components A + B.
REFERENCES
Gardiner, Sir A. 1976 (1927). Egyptian Grammar: Being an Introduction to the Study of Hieroglyphs.
Oxford: Ashmolean Museum and Griffith Institute.
Joshi, J.P. and A. Parpola. 1987. Corpus
of Indus Seals and Inscriptions. 1. Collections in India. Helsinki: Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia.
Keightley, D.N. 1985 (1978). Sources of Shang History: The Oracle-Bone
Inscriptions of Bronze Age China. Berkeley: University of California.
Korvink, M.P. 2008. The Indus Script: A Positional Statistical
Approach. Gilund Press (Amazon).
Koskenniemi, K. and Parpola, A. 1982. A Concordance to the Texts in the Indus
Script. Helsinki: Department of Asian and African Studies, University of
Helsinki.
Parpola, A., B.M. Pande, and P.
Koskikallio. 2010. Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions. 3. New Material,
Untraced Objects, and Collections Outside India and Pakistan. Helsinki:
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
Shah, S.G.M. and A. Parpola. 1991. Corpus
of Indus Seals and Inscriptions. 2. Collections in Pakistan. Helsinki:
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.
Wu, Y. and J. Janhunen. 2010. New Materials on the Khitan Small Script: A Critical Edition of Xiao
Dilu and Yelü Xiangwen. Leiden:
Global Oriental.
