Birds, Bugs, Prawns, and Men in the Indus Script: 14-Stroke Signs

Detail from seal M-142 with inscription: VEE IN DIAMOND / BI-QUOTES // LOOP ARMED MAN
WITH SLASH / COMB BELTED MAN WITH FEET (this version lacks the "high heels" of XIV 4).

Today’s first Indus sign is COMB BELTED MAN WITH HEELS (XIV 4), a symbol based on the list presented by Koskenniemi and Parpola (1982: 20-21).  Its previous enumerations include KP22 and W20 (in variant form).  The sign appears seven times on seals and tablets from Mohenjo daro.  Presumably, Fairservis would see this as a ligature of his L-9 (COMB) and A-1 (MAN).  Since he defines COMB as “to write” and MAN as “ruler,” perhaps he would combine these two and define the COMB BELTED MAN as “ruler who writes” or something like “supervisor of scribes.”  On the other hand, he also sees the COMB as a suffix, indicating the dative of humans, with the meaning of the ligature becoming “belonging to the ruler.”  This is, of course, mere speculation on my part.

Seal C-23 with inscription: BUGS ON STRIPED LEAF / 3 QUOTES (?) / CIRCLED BISECTED RECTANGLE / MAN WITH DEE-SLASH / CORN HOLDER // SHIELD / PANTS (?) // MAN WITH DOUBLE DEE-SLASHES / CIRCLED VEE (note that the "man" appears twice here, once with a single "D" & /, once with two; this indicates these are 2 signs).

The fifth symbol in my list of signs comprising 14 strokes is MAN WITH DOUBLE DEE-SLASHES (XIV 5).  This refers to the somewhat more realistic version that appears only once, at Chanhujo daro (C-23; but compare M-1316).  This variant has a rounded head, as well as feet.  Without these features, the symbol is enumerated KP36 and Fs A-17.  Wells alone separates this version as W49.

Seal H-447 with single-sign inscription: COW LEG BETWEEN SLASHES.

After these anthropomorphic symbols, we turn to zoomorphic signs, including COW LEG BETWEEN SLASHES (XIV 6), elsewhere enumerated KP46, W156, and Fs D-4.  Fairservis suggests that the animal haunch represents a tribe, with the additional marks (SLASHES) serving as the Dravidian affix –ī/ĭr (“to syllabize or designate meaning”).  The only place this sign occurs is at Harappa, where it is a singleton (H-447).

Bar seal H-155 with inscription: PINCERED CRAB (6 legs) / PINCH // STACKED 7 / QUINT-FORK.

The following sign is a second version of PINCERED CRAB (XIV 7).  Where the variant previously discussed has three “legs” on either side, this one has four.  In one form or another, it appears in the literature as KP75 (6-legged) and W88 (6- and 8-legged).  It is Wells’ variant “b,” which occurs once at Harappa (the 6-legged version appearing there twice and once at Mohenjo daro with “fat pincers”). 

A rendition of the Moche crab-man (Van Dinter 2006: 192).

Crab-like elements do not appear to be particularly popular in scripts or in art and I have found few parallels.  The crab does appear in South America, on pottery of the Moche, where it is frequently anthropomorphized (Donnan and McClelland 1999: 66, fig. 3.44e).

Seal fragment M-780 with partial inscription: CIRCLED VEE (?) / BI-QUOTES // BEARER (?) / BI-RAKE & TRI-FORK TOPPED POT / POT (the penultimate sign has a vertical "handle" on the left, not the case in all variants).

Taking a break from zoomorphs, we next examine the unusual BI-RAKE AND TRI-FORK TOPPED POT (XIV 8), also known as KP96 and W307.  I assume that Fairservis would make this a ligature of his Q-12 (BI-RAKE) and J-5 (POT).  He considers the latter to serve as 3^rd person singular honorific suffix, here appended to a stylistically doubled RAKE that symbolizes a proper name, Irukirā.  Wells observes twelve occurrences, 11 from Mohenjo daro and one from Harappa, also noting only a single variant.  I find two additional instances from Harappa and two more from Mohenjo daro, increasing the total to 15.  In addition, the form of the TRI-FORK portion varies, as does the “handle” of the BI-RAKE.  In fact, one instance actually has a BI-FORK and another two have a QUAD-FORK instead.  As far as I can tell, this is a symbol unique to the Indus Valley.

A dragonfly in Tsimshian style, from North America's northwest coast (Vin Dinter 2006: 94). 

Returning to the zoomorphic group, I now include DOTTED FLYING ANT (XIV 9), not shown as such in either Fairservis’ list or that of Koskenniemi and Parpola.  Wells does list this version of the ANT (W92), noting it to be a singleton from Mohenjo daro (M-890). 

Two filler motifs found on Near Eastern cylinder seals: the fish and the fly (Black and Green 1992: 96).

Insects are not as popular in scripts and art as are mammals and birds.  But they do appear periodically.  The bee and scarab beetle are prominent in Egyptian hieroglyphic writing (L2 and L1 respectively).  Other bugs include a fly (L3), a grasshopper or locust (L4), a centipede (L5), and the scorpion (L7).  The fly also appears in Mesopotamia as one the filler elements in cylinder seal art (Black and Green 1992: 84-5).  It may represent the god Nergal in his role as bringer of disease and death. 

A dragonfly as depicted on Moche pottery (Donnan and McClelland 1999: 60, fig. 3.35).

Although it bears no resemblance to the Indus ANT, a dragonfly occurs from time to time on Moche pottery from South America (Donnan and McClelland 1999: 60, fig. 3.35).  It is also found, in a very different depiction, in the art of North America's northwest coast (Van Dinter 2006: 93, Haida; 94, Tsimshian).

The Indus ANT also resembles the eyes found on so-called “eye idols” including some found at Tell Brak, Syria (Black and Green 1992: 78-80).  These amulets tend to have a simple body in the form of a flattened cone, above which the eyes appear without a surrounding face.  Some have eyebrows similar to the “wings” of the Indus “ant.”  The pupils of the eyes are typically filled with black or green paint.  Black and Green note that “The eye is a recurrent motif in art from the Early Dynastic to the Neo-Assyrian Period” in the Near East.  It is probably connected to belief in the Evil Eye.  It seems possible that the Indus ANT is a similar type of symbol, though this is only a tentative hypothesis.

Bar seal with inscription: POTTED 3 / MAN BY CHEVRON /
STRIPED BIRD WITH SINGLE WING / 3 QUOTES / BI-FORK TOPPED HAIR PICK.

The next Indus sign is STRIPED BIRD WITH SINGLE WING (XIV 10), perhaps to be identified with KP71 (which stands on its feet rather than on its tail) and both W99 and W100.  The bird may actually have an upright tail rather than one wing.  The version standing on its tail occurs twice at Mohenjo daro, as does the version standing on its feet, which indicates a total of four if we wish to group them together.

Proto-cuneiform NAM~b, "sparrow or swallow," a bird with a tail but lacking a wing.

Proto-cuneiform includes a number of bird signs, none striped.  Among others, these include GUN3, MUD, MUSZEN, RI, and NAM~b.  Of these, MUSZEN simply means “bird,” while the others represent specific species.

African Adinkra motif termed fafanto, "butterfly," symbol of tenderness, gentleness,
and fragility: life, too, is fragile, it suggests (Willis 1998: 104-5).

A bird in flight as seen in side view is relatively rare in script and art.  More often, both wings are visible, spread as if seen either from above or below.  But a few examples appear here and there in the Near East.  Such a bird occurs on cylinder seals from ancient Turkey and Iraq (Collon 2005: 53, fig. 210; p. 82, fig. 376; p. 191, fig. 925).

Various Moche seabirds, the one on the lower right showing a single upraised wing (Van Dinter 2006: 246).

Flying birds are typically seen from the side with a single wing visible in the South American pottery of the Moche (Donnan and McClelland 1999: 54, fig. 3.26a, a seabird; p. 58, fig. 3.31, a hummingbird).  One of the Old Chinese variants of niao3, "bird" with a long tail, is also a bird in side view, only one wing visible (Wieger 1965: 307-8). 

Seal M-107 with inscription: STRIPED BIRD WITH UPRAISED TAIL / BIRD & FISH BETWEEN PARENTHESES / BI-QUOTES // BELTED FISH / FOOTED STOOL WITH HAIRY LEGS & ATTACHED TRI-FORK / POT.

The next Indus sign is a ligature or composite: FISH AND BIRD BETWEEN PARENTHESES (XIV 11), also known as KP54 and W126.  Fairservis, as noted previously, considered the FISH to be a ligature itself, comprising the twist of thread L-3 with an affix P-11 (the “fins”), meaning “great lord, i.e., chief.”  The bird that apparently stands on its tail was to him a peacock (B-2).  Due to Dravidian near-homophones, he defines this symbol as “tail; sorcery, magic; child.”  The PARENTHESES receive the designation F-17, representing two crescent moons to indicate “day, light; summer, spring.”  He states that when signs are bracketed, each element is to be read separately (1992: 163).  So what does “chief” + “tail/magic/child” plus “day/light” mean?  “Day of the magic chief?”  “Chief of the day of the child?”

Old Chinese niao3, "bird," two variants.

Wells notes two occurrences of this complex symbol, one from Mohenjo daro and one from Harappa.  He notes only one variant, but the bird actually differs in these two.  The Harappan bird stands on its tail, while the one from Mohenjo daro stands on its feet with a drooping tail.

A fish depiction from proto-Elamite pottery from Tall-i Bakun (Potts 1999: 53, fig. 3.6).

Fish and birds both appear in cylinder seal art.  The former most often occur in connection with the Akkadian water god, Ea (Sumerian Enki), but also appear as designs or as filling motifs (Collon 2005: 187, e.g. figs. 761, 918, 930, and 931).  Birds are frequently found in such art, though they are less common than mammals (2005: 187, e.g. figs. 925 and 926). 

An elaborate fish motif from Mimbres pottery of the southwest of North America (Van Dinter 2006: 45).

Both birds and fish appear on Moche pottery of South America, also (Donnan and McClelland 1999: 54, fig. 3.26a, a seabird; p. 64, fig. 3.41, fishes).  They function to set the location of the main scene, the seacoast, or, in the case of the hummingbird, to indicate frenetic activity.

Seal Nd-2 with inscription: STRIPED PRAWN / CRAB / COMB.

We now come to another STRIPED PRAWN (XIV 12).  It appears in the literature as KP73, W148, and Fs C-1.  Fairservis identifies it as a prawn or shrimp, while others generally refer to it as a scorpion.  The “tail” always appears on one side of the “body,” while the “legs” appear on the other.  The elements at the top (pincers?) vary from one instance to another.  Sometimes they are symmetrical loops, at other times an “ear” shape on one side and a striped rectangle on the other.  Wells notes 44 total occurrences of all four variants.  Of these, 28 are from Mohenjo daro, 13 from Harappa, and one each from Lothal, Kalibangan, and Nindowari damb.

Motifs from proto-Elamite pottery of Tall-i Bakun, including lizards (left) and scorpion (right) (Potts 1999: 53, fig. 3.6).

The scorpion appears frequently in the Near East, as a motif on cylinder seals , on kudurru or boundary stones, and on pottery (Collon 2005: 146, fig. 617).  It is popular in most periods and appears in Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Turkey (2005: 187).  It is a symbol of the goddess Ishara in the Kassite Period (Black and Green 1992: 160-161).

Detail of an illustration of deities from the Egyptian Book of the Dead, showing the scorpion goddess Selket in the center (Faulkner 1994: Pl. 32).  Her name is written above her, the owl glyph G17 m, a preposition, is followed by the bolt O34 s, the mouth D21 r, the hill N29 q, and bread X1 t (reduced to a short dash).  

As noted in a previous post, the scorpion also features among the Egyptian hieroglyphs (L7).  For magical reasons, the tail is typically missing, though the creature is associated with a goddess, Selket. 

The Moche crab-man, identified as a lobster in Van Dinter (Donnan and McClelland 1999: 66, fig. 3.44e).

Another interpretation of the Indus sign is as a prawn.  A distant parallel for such a symbol appears on the pottery of the Moche, where it is frequently anthropomorphized (Donnan and McClelland 1999: 66, fig. 3.44b).

Round seal M-415 with inscription: CIRCLED DOT / PRAWN WITH ATTACHED POST.

The following symbol includes one version of the last: PRAWN WITH ATTACHED POST (XIV 13).  It is listed elsewhere as KP74 and W152, in the latter noted as a singleton from Mohenjo daro (M-415).  Not only is this a rare sign, but it also appears on a rare form of seal, a circular one.

Detail of seal H-57 with inscription: STACKED 12 BETWEEN PARENS / CHEVRON-HATTED BEARER (ARMLESS).

The final Indus sign for this post is STACKED TWELVE BETWEEN CEES (XIV 14), also known as KP143 and W216.  Wells finds it to be a singleton from Harappa (H-57).

Proto-cuneiform sign |EZEN~b x 6(N57)|, a ligature of "festival" and "six."

In proto-cuneiform, signs not infrequently enclose a number of short strokes, the latter often representing numerals.  One example is DU8~c @ g, which encloses a STACKED EIGHT.  It came to mean “to open; yoke; to prepare the threshing floor,” as well as other things.  Here, the apparent numeral has no enumerative function.  This differs from |EZEN~b x 6(N57)|, which encloses a STACKED SIX.  The first-named element came to mean “festival,” while the six strokes indicate the number 6.

REFERENCES

Black, J. and A. Green. 1992. Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia: An Illustrated Dictionary. Austin: University of Texas.

Collon, D. 1987 & 2005. First Impressions: Cylinder Seals in the Ancient Near East. London: British Museum.

Donnan, D.B. and D. and McClelland. 1999. Moche Fineline Painting: Its Evolution and Its Artists. Los Angeles: UCLA Fowler Museum of Cultural History.

Fairservis, W.A. 1992. The Harappan Civilization and Its Writing: A Model for the Decipherment of the Indus Script. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Faulkner, R.O. 1992. The Egyptian Book of the Dead: The Book of Going Forth by Day. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.

Gardiner, A. 1976 (1927). Egyptian Grammar: Being an Introduction to the Study of Hieroglyphs. Oxford: Griffith Institute and Ashmolean Museum.

Joshi, J.P. and A. Parpola. 1987. Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions. 1. Collections in India. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.

Koskenniemi, K. and A. Parpola. 1982. A Concordance to the Texts in the Indus Script. Helsinki: Dept. of Asian and African Studies, University of Helsinki.

Potts, D.T. 1999. The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. Cambridge: University Press.

Shah, S.G.M. and A. Parpola. 1991. Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions. 2. Collections in Pakistan. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.

Van Dinter, M.H. 2006. Tribal Tattoo Designs from the Americas. Amsterdam: Mundurucu.

Wells, B.K. 1998. An Introduction to Indus Writing: A Thesis (see previous post for website)

Wieger, L. 1965. (1927). Chinese Characters, Their Origin, Etymology, History, Classification and Signification. New York: Paragon and Dover.

Of Tables, Rakes, and Blankets in the Indus Script

Seal M-153 with inscription: DUCK HEAD / MAN HOLDING COMB / BIRD BETWEEN PARENTHESES.

Continuing with my enumeration of the Indus signs, I term the eleventh among those drawn with eleven strokes MAN HOLDING COMB (XI 11).  The object in the “man’s” hand could just as easily be called a “rake,” as there is a line from the end of the “arm” to the “comb.”  This attaching stroke is diagonal as it is in most other cases (e.g., MAN HOLDING CUP; MAN HOLDING FOOT, etc.).  In the case of each of these other symbols, this connection is not part of the object, as demonstrated by the existence of the independent signs CUP, FOOT, and so on, without an attached stroke.  Thus, I assume the object held in XI 11 is the COMB – which lacks such a connecting stroke -- rather than the RAKE, which requires a “handle.”

Bangle M-1639 with inscription: BOAT / MAN HOLDING 4 QUOTES (?) / STRIPED BISECTED TOP.

In any case, this symbol appears in other lists as KP26, W15, and Fs A-22.  Fairservis also sees this as a depiction of a man with a comb, defining it as “scribe” for reasons having to do with near homophones in Dravidian (“comb” being cippu, somehow associated with Kannada kiri “to shave,” which sounds like kiru “to scratch, mark, write,” hence the connection to a writer or scribe) (1992: 35).  Wells gives the total occurrences of this sign as seven, all but one from Mohenjo daro.  One instance listed in Wells’ catalog is probably an error: the sign on the seal from Lothal is MAN HOLDING QUOTE, with an unattached BI-QUOTES on the other side of the “head” of the anthropomorph (L-12).  A second instance may also be erroneous, though I am less certain of it.  Occurring on a bangle, it is marred by a crack passing through it (M-1639).  In this case, I see four short strokes above the connecting stroke that rises from the arm, but no horizontal line beneath the four “quotes.”  Thus, I take it to be an instance of MAN HOLDING FOUR QUOTES.

Detail of inscription from broken seal L-12: FIVE POSTS / MAN HOLDING QUOTE /
BI-QUOTES // CORN HOLDER (WITH ATTACHED LOOP?) / CRAB.

Wells subdivides this sign into three variants based on the number of “teeth” in the “comb.”  His “a” has five “teeth,” the central one appearing to be an extension of the connecting stroke; his “b” has four “teeth”; and his “c” has only three.  The connection between the “comb” element and the arm is not diagonal but vertical in the case of “c,” for which reason I took this to be an anthropomorph with the RAKE.  But Wells may be correct in grouping all of these together.  (Fairservis appears to view Wells’ “c” as “a man holding a stalk of wheat,” in my terms holding a TRI-FORK (A-26; 1992: 35).

Rock art motif of a man with rayed arc overhead from British Columbia (Keyser 1992: 51, fig. 24a).

The closest parallel to this Indus sign that I have observed comes from the rock art of North America.  Stick figure humans are common in many places, as is an element much like the Indus COMB (though termed a “rake” in the literature).  However, these two elements seldom join in a way that would appear to show the anthropomorph holding the “comb.”  In the Columbia Plateau region (the area of Washington, Idaho and British Columbia around the Columbia and Snake Rivers), there is a common motif combining an anthropomorph with a “rayed arc” (Keyser 1992: 61-62, figs. 35 and 36).  In most cases, the arc is either attached to the figure’s head or is just above it.  But occasionally, the arms of the anthropomorph bend at the elbow and the arc nearly descends to the ends of these arms, as if the human were holding it (e.g., fig. 35b). 

Rock art depiction of a supernatural being with comb-like hands in the Long Narrows style (Keyser 1992: 89, fig. 61c).

Depictions of supernatural beings are frequently found in the Long Narrows style of the Lower Columbia region.  A few of these show a comb-like element at the end of each arm (e.g., 1992: 88-89, figs. 60d and 61c).  In these cases, the “comb” most likely represents a hand.  In both the examples cited, each comb/hand has exactly five teeth/fingers.  This suggests one possible interpretation of the Indus signs of RAKE and COMB.  The former may depict a highly schematic arm, while the latter could represent just a hand.  These seem rather unlikely explanations, however, since both Indus signs frequently have fewer than five prongs (specifically, three or four) and occasionally more (six or seven).  Still, such inaccurate renderings of hands or feet, with the wrong number of digits, do occur in less stylized traditions.  Human footprints in Mixtec manuscripts sometimes have such inaccuracies (e.g., Smith 1973: 225, fig. 13a which includes a series of footprints showing three, four, and five toes).

Broken seal Pbm-1 with partial inscription: TWO POSTS (?) / POTTED ONE / RAKE / FISH / BI-RAKE / FISH (??).

The second Indus sign discussed in this post is BI-RAKE (XI 12), a symbol also enumerated KP95, W266, and Fs Q-12.  In appearance, it resembles the basic RAKE, but there are two rows of “tines,” one row placed over the other.  The central “handle” connects both these rows and descends beneath them.  Obviously, if this is related to the basic RAKE, it is hardly likely to represent an arm, since two hands do not appear on a single arm.

Cylinder seal from Susa, Iran with partially legible inscription including BI-RAKE / BIG SHOULDERED MAN / STACKED 12 (?) / DOUBLED BELTED DOUBLE AITCH / (perhaps a FISH also; over repeated bovines at the bottom). 

Fairservis considers this symbol to be essentially the same as the basic RAKE, doubled stylistically, and takes it to be a proper name.  But in at least one inscription, both the basic RAKE and the "doubled" BI-RAKE both appear, a fact which suggests they are independent symbols (see Pbm-1).  Wells, avoiding definitions, finds 15 occurrences, with 10 of them from Mohenjo daro (though I find 13), three from Harappa (I see 7), one from Lothal (I see 2), and one from Pabumath.  A BI-RAKE also appears in the Harappan-style inscription on a seal from Susa, Iran (Collon 2005: 143, fig. 608).  Wells and I also differ in the number of variants of this symbol.  He sees two, with the only difference being the number of “tines” on the uppermost “rake”: his “a” has five, while his “b” has four.  I would add a “c” with eight (M-741) and “d” with only three (H-701).  There might even be an “e” since the example from Susa seems to have six.

Proto-cuneiform sign NUN~a, "prince," which also occurs doubled and stacked, becoming NIR~a, also "prince."

In proto-cuneiform, there is a sign that is more like the Indus SHISH KEBAB, with the designation NUN~a.  This symbol also occurs doubled, then being transcribed NIR~a.  Both signs came to mean “prince.”  If this principle of doubling without a change in meaning applies to Indus signs (and there is no way of knowing whether it does), then Fairservis may be correct in seeing the BI-RAKE as nothing more than a fancier version of the RAKE.  I am hesitant to accept this, however, since a clearer example of a doubled RAKE is RAKE OVER RAKE (a 12-stroke sign to be discussed later).

Bar seal M-1271 with inscription: LOOP ARMED MAN HOLDING SLASH / CEE BOAT /
STRIPED FAT CHEVRON / STRIPED VEST / STRIPED TRIANGLE / SPACESHIP UNDER TABLE / COMB.

The following sign is SPACESHIP UNDER TABLE (XI 13), also known as KP222, W422, and perhaps to be viewed as Fs N-1, “mountains” under I-19, “sky; superior.”  However Fairservis saw it, there are three instances, as Wells notes, all from Mohenjo daro.

Proto-cuneiform |SILA3~a x KUR~a|, a combination of "market" and "(foreign) land."

The three stacked wedges denoting “mountain, (foreign) land” in proto-cuneiform are cited by Fairservis in his definition of the SPACESHIP element.  Thus, the proto-cuneiform |SILA3~a x KUR~a| may be considered more or less analogous to SPACESHIP UNDER TABLE.  Instead of a “table,” the proto-cuneiform includes a “greater than” shape with a wedge at the bend.  This portion came to mean “market, square.”  This makes one wonder whether the combination represented a foreign market.

Detail from seal M-896 with inscription: STRIPED TRIANGLE UNDER DOUBLE TABLES /
SINGLE QUOTE // TWO POSTS / MAN HOLDING POST / BEARER.

Our next sign is STRIPED TRIANGLE UNDER DOUBLE TABLES (XI 14).  It appears in the literature as KP213 (with 12 strokes) and W429 (also 12 strokes).  The actual sign is a bit difficult to make out in the photograph in the Corpus, but I think it may have only 11 strokes.  In any case, it is a singleton from Mohenjo daro (M-896).  It is also the only instance with a TABLE over another TABLE (over a third element).

Proto-cuneiform sign |SILA3~c x ZATU 687|, a combination of "market" and an unknown sign.

If the SILA3 cited under the previous sign may be taken as equivalent to the Indus TABLE, then there is an analogous sign in proto-cuneiform.  It includes a triangular element with a rounded base, rotated 90 degrees, beside the “greater than” element.  This combination is transcribed |SILA3~c x ZATU 687|.  Similar rounded triangles represent oil or a dairy product such as butter.  But this one, with both a vertical stripe and a horizontal stripe inside, may be distinct.

Seal M-1169 with inscription: TWO POSTS / BLANKET WITH 7 TICKS / BIRD BETWEEN PARENTHESES / BI-QUOTES // SKEWERED CHEVRON / FISH // (2nd row) TWO POSTS / FISH / CUPPED POST / THREE POSTS / SPEAR.

The fifth Indus sign is BLANKET WITH SEVEN TICKS (XI 15).  Only Wells notes this as an independent sign (W538), another singleton from Mohenjo daro (M-1169).  Fairservis considers all the BLANKET variations to represent enclosures, suggesting further that the varying marks inside indicate varying weights (1992: 100).  In his discussion of these variations, he shows BLANKETS with four, six, and eight “ticks” first, but also includes one with asymmetrically arranged seven (four at the top, three at the bottom, the same arrangement of strokes as in most occurrences of STACKED SEVEN).

There are certainly many square or rectangular symbols outside the Indus Valley.  But while it is easy enough to find grids, or internal stripes, or even quadrilaterals enclosing a cross or “X,” I have seen none with “ticks” elsewhere.  This symbol may be a unique type, found only in the Indus script.  It may be of interest to note, in addition, that while grids or checkerboards are among the entoptic shapes seen by those in altered states of consciousness such as trance, an element such as the BLANKET is not.

Broken seal M-637 with (partial?) inscription: BLANKET WITH 4 TICKS, 3 HYPHENS / POT.

The next sign may be a variant of the last: BLANKET WITH FOUR TICKS, THREE HYPHENS (XI 16).  Once again, only Wells enumerates this separately (W534), finding it to be yet another singleton from Mohenjo daro.  Fairservis does note its existence in his full discussion of the BLANKETS.  It could be that the internal marks represent numerals, as Fairservis suggests.  But if that were the case, one would expect instances with “one,” “two,” and “three” internal strokes.  As it is, “four” is the lowest apparent numeral and “ten” the highest.  In addition, some BLANKETS also include elements that differ from the usual “quote.”

Detail from seal H-598A with inscription: DUCK HEAD IN LEAF TOPPED POT / PRAWN /
ZEE / BI-QUOTES // WHISKERED FISH / BLANKET WITH 4 TICKS, 2 HYPHENS, & CEE / POT.

There is one more similar sign: BLANKET WITH FOUR TICKS, TWO HYPHENS, AND CEE (XI 17).  It appears in other lists as KP270(c), W536 and 537, and Fs G-15.  Despite his suggestion that the internal marks are numerical, Fairservis defines this symbol as representing a proper name.  Wells, for his part, gives two versions: W536 containing the 4 “ticks,” a backward “C” shape, and 2 “hyphens” of the name, while W537 contains the same “ticks” and “cee” but then two “quotes.”  Since both are singletons from Harappa, I have combined them (somewhat arbitrarily) as two variants of a single sign.

Detail from seal C-8 with inscription: STRIPED BATTERY WITH ATTACHED LOOP / POTTED ONE / BELTED FISH / CIRCLED TRI-FORK / POT (note that the small LOOP is not an independent sign, but part of a ligature here).

After these BLANKETS, I include an eleven-stroke STRIPED BATTERY (XI 18).  It appears only in Wells’ list as an independent form (W477”c”).  Both Fairservis and the team of Koskenniemi and Parpola recognize a striped version of the BATTERY, but in both cases the stripes are mostly vertical (KP290, Fs G-2, my X 10).  The version with eleven strokes has only horizontal stripes.  As such, it seems to occur twice, once at Mohenjo daro and once at Chanhujo daro.  However, the photographs clearly show that in both of these, there is a loop attached to the BATTERY which Wells failed to include.

Three variants of proto-cuneiform URUDU, "copper," analogous to the Indus (STRIPED) BATTERY.

Proto-cuneiform provides good analogies to the STRIPED BATTERY portion – though without any attachment.  The sign URUDU includes a variant with some vertical and horizontal stripes (variant “d”) and one with diagonal stripes (variant “c”).  These came to mean “copper.”

Seal L-86 with inscription: GRID (2 X 4) WITH ATTACHED POST / BACKSLASHES IN OVERLAPPING
CIRCLES / TRI-FORK (note the rough appearance of the signs, with the GRID leaning to one side).

Another sort of attachment appears in the following Indus sign: GRID WITH ATTACHED POST (XI 19), also known as KP269 and W505.  It is interesting to note that the sign presents a very neat appearance in both of these published lists, with perfectly vertical sides.  On the actual seal from Lothal, the GRID element has a definite tilt to one side, though.  It should actually be placed among the signs with ten strokes (the GRID including 2 x 4 internal squares), but I include it here due to its appearance in the list of Koskenniemi and Parpola (including 3 x 4 internal squares).  Grids are common around the world, perhaps due to their inclusion among the entoptic shapes, but with such an attachment this sign becomes unique.

Inscription from bar seal M-391: FOUR TOED FOOT / STACKED STOOLS WITH MID POST / VEE IN DIAMOND / BI-QUOTES // CIRCLED E TRI-FORK / BACKSLASH IN FISH / 3 QUOTES / CIRCLE BETWEEN CEES / POT // COMB BELTED ASTERISK / SLASHES IN OVERLAPPING CIRCLES / QUAD-FORK (two units of info may be included).

Today’s final sign is COMB BELTED ASTERISK (XI 20), appearing elsewhere as KP249 and W435.  It is a singleton from Mohenjo daro (M-391), combining the “X” with doubled “quotes” in the upper and lower parts (the ASTERISK of eight strokes), with a “comb” across the middle that includes four “teeth.”  As with some of the other ligatures discussed in this post, the individual elements have analogs in many other scripts and art traditions, but I have seen no such combination elsewhere.

Indus Signs of Nine Strokes

Three types of proto-cuneiform "nine": N14 (circles), N01 (wedges), and N18 (slashed circles).

As usual, I begin the discussion of the Indus symbols made with nine strokes by noting apparent numerals.  There are three different signs that are made up of nine short strokes grouped together.  The first of these displays the marks in a simple row: NINE QUOTES (IX 1).  Koskenniemi and Parpola include this sign in their list as KP129(a), but Wells does not note it.  Neither does Fairservis, who states that there are no occurrences of this form “nine” (1992: 62).  If it does actually occur (and I have no reason to doubt Koskenniemi and Parpola), it is probably a singleton or at least very rare.

Detail of seal H-23 with inscription: STACKED NINE (5 X 4) / QUAD-FORK /
HAIRY HUNCHBACK / WINGED MAN / POT.

The second apparent numeral is STACKED NINE (IX 2), also known as KP129(b), W219, and Fs O-14.  I designate this form in my database on inscriptions as STACKED NINE (5 X 4) in order to differentiate it from a second stacked form, one to be discussed shortly.  Fairservis does not hesitate to identify this one as the number nine, adjectival form, noting two occurrences (1992: 62).  This identification is rather surprising since he elsewhere suggests that the Harappans had a base eight number system – in which case, they should use a distinct symbol for “eight” and that plus a single quote for “nine.”  That fact demonstrates to the satisfaction of most scholars that the Harappans did not have a base eight number system, or at least the evidence does not support the existence of such an unusual number system.  In any case, this form includes five short strokes in an upper row, with four short strokes in another row beneath them.

In proto-cuneiform, “nine” occurs in a variety of forms, most of which are not quite like this Indus sign.  Only the sign designated 9(N58) takes this precise shape.  Another form of “nine” includes the same configuration of strokes, but is rotated 90 degrees (N57).  Three types of proto-cuneiform “nine” are written as a column of four wedges alongside a second identical column, with a ninth wedge that is larger than those in the columns at the base (N01, the same but with larger wedges as N34, and the larger wedges with two short strokes added to the right and left sides of each wedge as N36).  The very similar pattern of five marks in a column alongside a second column of four marks occurs in six other forms of “nine” (simple wedges as N08, circular indentations as N14, larger circles as N45, small circles with a diagonal stroke added to each as N18, circles with two strokes on each side as N19, and circles with three diagonal strokes crossing each as well as a fourth stroke to the right as N20).

There are also two different forms of the numeral “one” that contain nine short strokes, in proto-cuneiform.  In the first of these, a long wedge bears nine horizontal strokes across it (N12).  In the second, a large circular impression contains a “stacked nine” of five strokes over four (N63).  There are many different types of numeral in this system because there were distinct enumerative systems for different types of item.  In much the same way, in modern English, we have special terms for measures of liquids that differ from the terms for weight, which differ yet again from terms for length or distance.  There are eight ounces in a cup, two cups in a pint, two pints in a quart, and four quarts in a gallon (in the U.S., that is).  But when speaking of weight, we say that 16 ounces make a pound, even though “ounce” is the same word in both systems.  In measuring length, we say there are 12 inches in a foot, three feet in a yard, and so on.  If we wrote these varying measures in a proto-cuneiform fashion, we might use N01 numerals for liquid measures, N02 symbols for weight measures, and N08 signs for length measures.

Tablet H-322A with inscription (from right to left): STACKED EIGHT (originally nine?) /
TWO POSTS / POT / COMB (note the marks in the "numeral" are not vertical but diagonal,
which some researchers consider significant; but the COMB also has diagonal "tines" and the
same researchers do not remark on this).

Moving on, the third Indus sign comprising nine strokes is STACKED NINE (3 X 3 X 3), or IX 3.  It occurs in the literature as KP141(b), W227, and Fs N-2.  Fairservis does not consider this a numeral, but describes it as a depiction of a river or stream, meaning “water.”  Since the individual strokes are not perfectly vertical, but “slashes” (and backslashes), it is possible that he is right about this not being simply a second version of “nine.”  Wells, for his part, notes this sign as a singleton from Mohenjo daro (identified as Marshall No. 273).  However, I find one of these at Harappa (H-322) and one from Lothal (L-47).

Proto-cuneiform LUM, "manure" (upper left) and "nine" (N19, upper right);
non-numerical Luwian nu (lower left) and ki (lower right).

Among the Luwian hieroglyphs, there is one that is made up of short, vertical strokes in three rows of three.  It is not a numeral, though it looks like it ought to be.  Instead, it functions as a phonetic symbol, representing the syllable nú.  There may still be an indirect relationship with a number, though, because “nine” in Luwian derives from Proto-Indo-European *newn (the second "n" needs a small circle beneath it to denote a syllabic nasal) (Watkins 2000: 58).  The Luwian "nine" itself is unknown.  If any of the Indus signs has a phonetic value – a possibility that has yet to be proven – some or all of the apparent numerals might serve a parallel phonetic function. 

Then again, this could be just another way of writing “nine” since proto-cuneiform provides such a parallel.  One variant of the N19 form of “nine” is made up of nine circles, each with two strokes attached to either side, in three rows of three.  Still, there is another analogous proto-cuneiform sign, one made up of stacks of diagonal marks.  In LUM, seven strokes angle one direction alongside another stack of seven strokes, these angling the other direction, and a final set of seven angles like the first.  Thus, the whole symbol resembles a stack of “Z’s” (rotated 90 degrees).  Having no numeric significance, this sign came to mean “manure” and “cloud” (Halloran 2006: 164).

Sometimes elements that resemble numerals are combined with something else, in various writing systems.  In proto-cuneiform, for example, a “stacked eight” of four strokes over four appears beneath a chevron, the whole thing rotated 90 degrees (GI6).  This came to mean “night, shade.”  Thus, while it appears numerical, the presence of the chevron changes its function to a semantic one.  Similarly, in Luwian, a “stacked four” is bracketed by two lines resembling elongated “Z” shapes to form ki, perhaps the first syllable in a word meaning “fourth, quarter” or something similar (< Proto-Indo-European *kwetwer- / *kwetwor; Watkins 2000: 45).

Tablet H-205 with inscription (from right to left): DIAMOND WITH BACKSLASH / CUP /
STACKED SEVEN BETWEEN PARENTHESES / POT.

Indus signs provide a parallel, with STACKED SEVEN BETWEEN PARENTHESES (IX 4), also known as KP136(b) and W204.  Wells notes a total of 16 occurrences, with two from Mohenjo daro, two from Harappa, and 12 from Lothal.  Of the last group, items L-161 through L-170 are duplicates.  There is also SEVEN QUOTES BETWEEN PARENTHESES (IX5).  It appears in the literature as KP136(a) and W214, a singleton from Harappa (H-156).  A third example may be a variant of the latter, SEVEN POSTS BETWEEN PARENTHESES (IX 6).  It appears only in Wells’ list, as W215, where it is a singleton from Chandigarh (Ch-2).  The distinction between “quotes” (or short strokes) and “posts” (or long strokes) is not always entirely clear, especially where there are no other signs for comparison.  But in these two cases, the distinction is clear enough. 

Inscription from H-156: SEVEN QUOTES BETWEEN PARENTHESES / POT.

Inscription Ch-1 (right to left): DUBYA / SEVEN POSTS BETWEEN PARENTHESES / POT.

Not all the nine-stroke symbols appear to be numerals, though.  There is another STRIPED MALLET (IX 7), this one with three internal stripes.  It is also identified as KP280, variant “B” of W470, and Fs N-10.  Fairservis suggests that it represents a sign for a place, perhaps in the sense of a determinative like Egyptian O49 (a “fat ex” in a circle).  Wells finds a total of 23 occurrences of striped “mallets,” but does not indicate which ones contain what number of stripes.  They appear at Mohenjo daro, Harappa, Lothal, and Kalibangan.  However, I see this or a similar sign 16 times at Harappa and 20 times at Mohenjo daro, in addition to the single instance from Lothal and that from Kalibangan.  If my count is correct, then there are 38 in all.

Detail from seal H-1 with inscription: FAT EX / BATTERY / STRIPED MALLET (3 stripes) / CARTWHEEL.

The next sign is CAGED MALLET (IX 8), also KP277, W471, and in Fairservis a combaintion of G-9 + P-9.  Fairservis defines the “mallet,” which he sees as an enclosure with a pillar, as “number nine; cow(s).”  The four dots (or short vertical strokes) surrounding the central element are drops of milk, he thinks.  Putting these two together makes “tribute (of milk cattle); to flow (as with water).”  Since there are several better possibilities for a “nine,” I think it most unlikely that the “mallet” element has that meaning.  In any case, Wells cites three examples of the CAGED MALLET, one from Mohenjo daro and two from Harappa.  I see three from Mohenjo daro and three from Harappa (two of the latter being duplicates), giving a slightly larger total of six occurrences.

Detail from seal H-67 with inscription: SINGLE POST / CAGED MALLET.

We come to a very peculiar sign next, STRIPED MALLET BETWEEN BI-QUOTES (IX 9).  It appears as a separate symbol only in Wells’ list (W474), one which he thinks is a singleton.  However, I see quite a few duplicates of the copper tablets bearing this sign: M-519 through M521, M-575 through M-577, and M-592.  If each object bearing the sign is counted, there are seven occurrences.  Some scholars count elements in the duplicates only once apiece.  Following this procedure, there are three distinct occurrences.  In each case, the “striped mallet” portion is adorned with a short “quote” mark on each side of the “handle,” near the top. 

Tablet M-592A with broken inscription (right to left): MAN HOLDING QUOTE / STRIPED MALLET BETWEEN BI-QUOTES / SINGLE QUOTE (?) / MAN HOLDING POST / DOUBLE GRIDS (note that "shield" on B side, right, is not listed as a sign, although other symbols found in the same context -- alone on the "B" side of a tablet -- are so listed).

While there are no parallels for the four-mark “caging” that appears so often in the Indus script, I do find an analog for this peculiar two-mark “cage.”  It occurs in proto-cuneiform, where TAR~a – which alone resembles the Indus BI-QUOTES – appears in combination with other elements to form additional signs.  Alone, this symbol came to mean “to cut, separate.”

Tablet M-519A with inscription (right to left): POTTED TRIPLE SLASHES (?) / CUPPED TRIPLE SLASHES (?) / MAN HOLDING QUOTE / STRIPED MALLET BETWEEN BI-QUOTES / SINGLE POST / MAN HOLDING POST / DOUBLE GRIDS (probably the same inscription as on M-592).

The last sign for this post is EXIT UNDER TABLE (IX 10).  It is a singleton, elsewhere known as KP286 and W478.  I reminds me of an Old Chinese character, ting2, “the phonetic ding1 [which resembles our letter “T”]...replaced the [mouth, later a square] at the bottom [of a previously discussed character, gao1]....Pavilion, terrace” (Wieger 1965: 191).

Detail from seal M-742 with inscription: EXIT UNDER TABLE / PINCH / TWO POSTS / DIAMOND / MAN.

Proto-cuneiform, which so often provides parallels, does not have a similar sign.  There are elements resembling thicker versions of the “table” (ZATU 750), other symbols comparable to the “exit” (ZATU 737 and |ZATU 737 x SZE~a1|).  And there are signs made up of one symbol beside or beneath another (e.g., |SILA3~a x HI|).  But these individual pieces do not combine in a manner resembling the Indus EXIT UNDER TABLE.  This will become a familiar pattern as we proceed through the remainder of the Indus signs, those containing nine or more strokes.  The more complex signs have analogs much less often than the simple ones, with a few notable exceptions.  But I will have more to say about this later.

Old Chinese ting2, "pavilion."

And proto-cuneiform:

ZATU 737, three variants.