Last Group of Indus Signs

Bar seal M-411 with inscription: FLYING BIRD / 3 POSTS / POT //
WHISKERED FISH / SLASH IN FISH / OVERLAPPING CIRCLES / TRI-FORK.

When the signs become complex, it is difficult to count strokes, making this a less than ideal method of organizing them.  For this reason, I will briefly cover the rest of the signs in my list, from those classed as 19 strokes to 24.  The first of these is a variant of a previous sign, differing only in the number of stripes: FLYING BIRD (XIX 1).  Elsewhere it is enumerated KP70, W98 and Fs B-4. 

Bird depicted in northwestern North America (Keyser 1992: 96, fig. 70b).

Flying birds are frequently depicted as here, that is, with both wings spread.  In fact, that seems to be the most common form outside the Indus Valley.  I will note here only the North American Thunderbird, the designation most often given to birds with spread wings that appear in Native American art.  Examples occur in the southwest in Texas (Newcomb and Kirkland 1996: 47, Pl. 13, no. 3; p. 116, Pl. 74; p. 186, Pl. 135 no. 16-A), in the northwest in Washington (Keyser 1992: 90, fig. 63a & b; p. 96, fig. 70b), and in Navaho sand paintings (Newcomb and Reichard 1975: 47 and Pl. XV, detail p. 61 and Pl. XXIX as Thunderbirds).

Bar seal Krs-1 with inscription: CUPPED SPOON / QUADRUPED / SHISH KEBAB / PINCH //
THREE POSTS / CIRCLED TRIPLE BRICK / PANTS / CHEVRON / SINGLE QUOTE //
STACKED TRIPLE CIRCLES (possibly three units of information).

Broken seal M-1319 with partial inscription: QUADRUPED /
DOUBLE CEES / BI-QUOTES //CIRCLED TRI-FORK / CRAB / (lost).

Quadrupeds are the next symbols in my list.  There is a striped version with a rounded “nose” and simple vertical “tail” facing left (XIX 2) and another with ears that faces the opposite direction (XIX 3).  In his latest work, Parpola distinguishes two quadrupeds among the Indus signs, designated 46 a-j when facing right, 47 a-g when facing left.  Some depictions are reasonably realistic, while others are so stylized that it is anyone’s guess what they are.  Although horned bovines dominate as the iconic element (especially the “unicorn” bull), none of those used as signs appear to have horns.

Tablet M-1356 with inscription: SWASTIKA / ENDLESS KNOT (or two icons).

There follows another DOUBLE GRIDS (XX 1), that we need not discuss further (three columns of five squares each).  After it I have placed one of the more elaborate versions of the ENDLESS KNOT (XX 2).  This one occurs once at Mohenjo daro (M-1356).  Having previously discussed such motifs, I add nothing further here.

Broken seal H-577 with partial inscription: PRAWN (?) / 4 QUOTES / BUD & CHEVRON TOPPED POT / POT.

After this, I list BUD AND CHEVRON TOPPED DUBYA (XXI 1), found elsewhere as KP117 (without the additional chevrons), W320, and Fs J-3 (again without the additional chevrons).  Fairservis suggests that it represents a quantity of woven cloth or spun thread.  Wells states that it is a singleton from Harappa (H-577).  It is probably best grouped with other DUBYA symbols with various tops (LOOP TOPPED DUBYA, CIRCLE TOPPED DUBYA, BUD TOPPED DUBYA, etc.).

Broken seal M-639 with inscription: POTTED BI-RAKE ON CARTWHEEL
 / FEATHERED DUCK HEAD / BI-QUOTES // RAKE / CAGED FISH.

The following sign is a ligature of three elements: POTTED BI-RAKE ON CARTWHEEL (XXI 2).  It appears in the literature as KP330 and W328.  It is a singleton from Mohenjo daro (M-639).  Afterward, I noted another CRAB IN LEAF TOPPED POT (XXII 1), but as a variant of a previous sign, it needs no further discussion.

Seal M-288 with inscription: DOUBLE MEN CARRYING TRIANGLE / LAMBDA /
POTTED ONE / HAIRY HUNCHBACK / POT / MAN // CARTWHEEL.

Yet another DOUBLE GRIDS (2 x 7) follows based on Wells’ enumeration (XXII 2).  He designates it W513, finding a single instance from Mohenjo daro (M-25).  After this common type of symbol, there is another singleton, DOUBLE MEN CARRYING TRIANGLE (XXII 3).  It is also enumerated KP6, W52, and Fs A-11.  Fairservis sees this as two men with a carrying pole who bear a conical weight (a very large weight!).  Perhaps, he suggests, it should be defined as, “one who assembles.”  I would have expected, "one who carries."

Seal M-290 with inscription: COW LEG / QUADRUPED / COMB.

Afterward, I originally included three more quadrupeds (XXII 4, XXIV 1, XXIV 2), which need not detain us.  Suffice it to say that Wells enumerates each separately, being the “splitter” that he is, while others group these with the other quadrupeds, being “lumpers.”  I now think it better to “lump,” at least with regard to quadrupeds.

Bar seal M-1336 with inscription: QUADRUPED / MALLET / POTTED THREE.

The third sign of twenty-four strokes is POT HATTED BEARER WITH RAKE (XXIV 3), also known as KP5 only.  Following Fairservis’ criteria, this ligature would combine the meaning “Great Guardian” (the “bearer” with his “hat”) with “downriver, south” (the “comb”).  So, perhaps we should rename this fellow the Great Southern Guardian.  But he disappears from Parpola’s later list (2009).  I am inclined to delete him myself.

Bar seal M-1262 with inscription: DOUBLE EF PRONGED EXITS / FOOTED STOOL WITH
MID OVAL / POTTED THREE / SINGLE QUOTE // FOUR QUOTES / E TRI-FORK.

Wells prompts me to now note DOUBLE EF PRONGED EXITS (XXIV 4), his W479.  It occurs once at Mohenjo daro, he observes (M-1262).  I see another instance from Lothal (L-105).  The single “exit” of this type is Fairservis’ “irrigation sluice,” so I imagine he would say the doubled instances are “two irrigation sluices.”

This odd symbol is vaguely like the proto-cuneiform DUB~b, a rectangle filled with hash marks, with two strokes extending from the left side (the “ef prongs”).  This came to mean “clay tablet” as well as “to store, heap up; divide off; mark off a sector; move in a circle; shake; pour out; sprinkle; dye (fabric); beat, crush (cloth).”  It has no relationship to the Indus sign, I am sure.

Seal M-627 with inscription: FISH / SINGLE POST / SINGLE QOTE // GRID (3 X 7) / POTTED ONE / STRIPED LOOP UNDER CHEVRON / DOUBLE GRIDS (3 X 7) (this may be evidence that doubling creates a different symbol from the single appearance, and that Wells is correct in separating single from doubled instances in his list).

Another DOUBLE GRIDS appears here in my list (XXIV 5), with three columns of 7 squares each.  Then, finally, the last sign is DOUBLE STACKED TWELVES (XXIV 6).  Again, only Wells notes this to be a sign in its own right (W207).  He finds nine instances, one apiece from Harappa and Lothal, plus seven from Kalibangan (duplicate bas-relief tablets made in a mould).  On the Kalibangan tablets, there is a small separation between the two sets of strokes, so it really seems to be a doubling of the STACKED TWELVE.  However, in the other two examples, there is no such separation.  The Harappa and Lothal examples look like three rows of eight marks each, making 24.  I do not know if this is significant, so I include Wells’ sign here as a safeguard.  Note that Fairservis does not recognize this as one of the apparent numerals.  He thinks it means rain.

Tablet K-69 with inscription (from right to left): DOUBLE MEN (over SLASH?) / DOUBLED STACKED TWELVES / BI-QUOTES // RAKE OVER RAKE / DEE / DEE-SLASH (note the small space between 1st and 2nd "12").

It is interesting to note how many tally marks appear in other areas, where meanings remain unknown.  In North America, such marks are frequently found in rock art.  They are frequent in Texas (e.g., Newcomb and Kirkland 1996: 47, Pl. 13, no. 2; p. 90 Pl. 50, no. 1; p. 122 Pl. 80; p. 149, Pl. 99 no. 7).  Groups of two short marks may often represent deer tracks, while a single stroke may be the remnant of a more complex motif that has been largely lost to weathering.  But larger groups occur in great numbers through all periods and in all styles.  Smaller groups predominate -- threes, fours, and sixes being particularly common -- but much larger groups also appear here and there (including 9, 13, 16, 18, 26, 51, and 80). 

Replica of L-115 with inscription: SINGLE POST / DOUBLE STACKED TWELVES / CUPPED POST / TABLE.

Similarly, Australian rock art also includes so-called tally marks, groups of usually vertical lines (Layton 2009: 146, 197).  Some have construed these as enumerative, saying the people marked down the number of months they spent at the site (of the rock art) in this manner.  However, there is no way of verifying this for the oldest art, which was made over 10,000  years ago (2009: 242).  In any case, groups of more than 24 "tallies" are not at all rare.  This makes it all the more interesting that 12 and its double, 24, are the highest apparent numerals in the Indus script.  I take this as further evidence that the seals and tablets were not economic accounts and the apparent numerals were not functioning in the same way as those on proto-cuneiform and proto-Elamite tablets.

Detail from seal H-14 with inscription: DOUBLE STACKED TWELVES / RAKE / PINCH //
WHISKERED FISH / BI-RAKE & BI-FORK TOPPED POT / POT (no space between 12's here).

REFERENCES

Fairservis, W.A. 1992. The Harappan Civilization and Its Writing. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

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

Keyser, J.D. 1992. Indian Rock Art of the Columbia Plateau. Seattle: University of Washington.

Layton, R. 2009 (and 1992). Australian Rock Art: A New Synthesis. Cambridge: University Press.

Newcomb, W.W. Jr. and F. Kirkland. 1996. The Rock Art of Texas Indians. Austin: University of Texas.

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

Wells, B.K. 1998. An Introduction to Indus Writing: A Thesis. (also see Epigraphic Approaches to Indus Writing. Oxford and Oakville: Oxbow Books.)

Indus Signs of 15 Strokes from Bearer to Dotted House

Impression on pot M-1372 with inscription (right to left): WINGED MAN BETWEEN CEES / POT HATTED BEARER (his "shoulder yoke" is clearly bent in the original photograph, though I have poorly reproduced it here). 

As I discuss the signs that remain in my list, I will only refer in passing to variations on signs previously covered.  Thus, while the first fifteen-stroke symbol is POT-HATTED BEARER (XV 1), I have little to say about it.  I note only that the variant with fifteen strokes either has a single horizontal line forming both “arms,” or else is armless and has a bent “shoulder yoke.”  The first appears once at Mohenjo daro and once at Chanhujo daro, while the second occurs twice at Harappa and once at Mohenjo daro.  These two types are included in the sign enumerated KP4 and Fs A-8, which Fairservis defines as “Great/High Guardian.”  Wells separates them into W5b and W8. 

Seal M-328 with inscription: MAN HOLDING POST / POT-HATTED BEARER.

The following sign is included on the basis of Wells’ list, where it is enumerated W55.  I term it POT-HATTED BEARER WITH SINGLE JUG (XV 2).  However, this sign actually is an instance of the previous one, with straight “arms.”  One “jug” is very thin, but it still was carved with two lines.  Note that one or another "bearer" appears alongside another anthropomorphic sign periodically.  In these cases, the artisan who made the seals did not depict the anthropomorph in quite the same way both times!  It is possible that this indicates a significance for the "bearer" that does not involve humans.  Note also that Korink finds all of the "bearers" (regardless of their form and regardless of their "hats") to be terminal elements (2007: 28-31).  They may occur after certain other terminals -- including COMB, SPEAR, POT, and MAN, and before COMB.

Pot shard L-221 with inscription: POT HATTED BEARER / MAN ON DOUBLE CARTWHEELS (it is quite possible that the sequence should be reversed, i.e., that the inscription "reads" from right to left, with the "bearer" at the end).

Today’s third sign is MAN ON DOUBLE CARTWHEELS (XV 3).  It appears in the literature as KP21 and W63.  Wells notes it to be a singleton from Lothal (L-221) where it shows up on a pot shard.  The closest parallel is in Egyptian, where glyph A39 depicts a man standing on the backs of two long-necked animals.  This symbol is an ideograph in Qis or Qsy, the name of the town of Cusae, with the panther-headed animals the emblem of that place (Gardiner 1976: 446).

Detail from seal M-10 with inscription: SPACESHIP / BIRD BETWEEN PARENTHESES / BI-QUOTES //
CIRCLED BI-FORK / FISH UNDER CHEVRON / CUPPED SPOON / 6 POSTS / SKEWERED
CHEVRON / LAMBDA / QUAD-FORK (note the two-pronged "tail" of the "bird").

There follows another BIRD BETWEEN PARENTHESES (XV 4), also known as KP67, and W96 plus W97.  This “bird” has a “tail” of two prongs, differentiating it from previous versions.  But whether this is significant cannot be determined at this point.  Combining the two symbols as depicted in Wells’ list, there are still only 13 occurrences, mostly from Mohenjo daro, but one apiece from Harappa, Lothal, and Kalibangan as well.

Tablet H-951A & B with inscriptions (right to left): MALLET / STRIPED FAT LEG LAMBDA / MAN HOLDING DOUBLE SHISH KEBABS / BUGS ON STRIPED LEAF (A side); FOUR POSTS / CUP (B side).  Note the "shish
kebabs" have three rather than four strokes.

The next symbol is MAN HOLDING DOUBLE SHISH KEBABS (XV 5).  To include 15 strokes, each “kebab” should have four crossing strokes, although I only count three myself.  It is shown in other lists as KP29, W60, and Fs A-25.  Since I discussed the 13-stroke version earlier, I will add nothing further here.

Bar seal M-366 with inscription: POTTED 3 / MAN BY CHEVRON / BIRD WITH UPRIGHT TAIL / 3 QUOTES / BI-FORK TOPPED HAIR PICK (note that this "bird" is standing on its "tail," perhaps to take up less room?). 

Another bird follows: STANDING BIRD WITH UPRIGHT TAIL (XV 6), this time with both the body and the tail striped.  It may be the same as KP71, and is certainly W99 and W100.  It seems to me that the bird either stands on its feet or on its tail depending on how much room the artisan allowed it.  It should accordingly be grouped with others of its kind, regardless of the stroke number.

Detail from seal M-91 with inscription: BI-RAKE / PRAWN / VEE IN DIAMOND /
BI-QUOTES // 2 POSTS / FISH / CRAB / WINGED MAN / POT.

Another STRIPED PRAWN comes afterward (XV 7).  As KP73, it has 12 strokes; as Fs C-1 it has 15 and is included here for that reason.  It also appears as W148, in four variants. 

Seal M-1188 with (partial?) inscription: BLANKET (6 TICKS) / HEADLESS FLYING BIRD / BI-QUOTES // WHISKERED FISH (?) // DOUBLED BLANKETS (?) / MAN HOLDING DEE-SLASH / TRI-FORK / (?).

The HEADLESS FLYING BIRD (XV 8) also makes a second appearance.  With just 13 strokes, it is KP65, while Fairservis gives it 17 as C-4.  Wells notes three variants of his W150.  There are four occurrences, all told, but just one has 15 strokes (M-1188).  Fairservis suggests that it depicts a bee rather an a bird, with the meaning “honey.”  He also considers it a depiction of a flying fish meaning “beauty, dance.”  While it might be either one, it seems hardly credible that it is both.

Seal C-29 with inscription: 2 POSTS / BLANKET (6? TICKS) / OVERLAPPING CIRCLES / PANTS / SINGLE QUOTE // 2 POSTS / STRIPED LEAF / POT // BACKSLASH AND 2 POSTS (or is the last sign really two?).

We find another STRIPED LEAF here (XV 9), as it occurs on a seal from Chanhujo daro (C-29).  the number of strokes in the many variations of this symbol varies from perhaps as few as seven to as many as 15.  But all should probably be grouped together.  Elsewhere it is identified as KP112, W254, and Fs E-6.

Seal B-12 with inscription: GRAIN EAR // STACKED SEVEN (a most unusual form of both signs).

A second GRAIN EAR follows (XV 10), elsewhere listed as KP100, W270, and Fs E-1.  It occurs rarely, just three times according to Wells, but the number of prongs differs each time.  Fairservis considers it a tree with the rather improbable meaning “cow.”

Egyptian unguent vase from King Tut's tomb: ears of grain appear above the depiction of the
lion attacking the bull and in front of the bull's leg (from a postcard).

Assuming it is actually a plant, I find multiple parallels.  Egyptian glyph M34 is almost identical, signifying emmer wheat.  Proto-cuneiform SZE is horizontally extended but otherwise the same, with the meaning “barley.”  Old Chinese feng1, “boughs; abundance” is similar but shows fewer prongs.  This is also the case with the Cretan hieroglyph O25 which probably represents the syllable te.  In Luwian, the simpler GRAIN EAR with only three prongs on each side is covered by a “table” to represent the syllable tù. 

Punchmarked coin motif 100, considered a tree (Gupta 1960: Pl. II, no. 100).

In later India, similar forms appear on punchmarked coins.  The symbol is termed a “tree” at times, when it occurs in motifs 73, 87, and 100 (Gupta 1960: Pl. II).  A variation on this theme even appears on the Phaistos Disk, though with small loops instead of prongs.  The simple type with prongs is among the motifs found in Old Europe as well (OE 14).

Motifs from the rock art of Texas, with "grain ear" near center (Newcomb and Kirkland 1996: 100, no. 2, fig. 33).

Almost the same motif is found in North American rock art.  It is sometimes interpreted as a feather in Texas (Newcomb and Kirkland 1996: 21, Pl. 5 and 6).  In Nevada it appears 50 times, where it is identified as the joint pine Ephedra (Heizer and Baumhoff 1984: 79).  Perhaps the simplest version appears frequently in art of the Northwest Columbia Plateau (Keyser 1992 59, f. 33).  Here, such motifs are thought to represent fir boughs used in ritual bathing.

African adinkra symbol nyame nti, "by God's grace."

A similar symbol appears in Africa.  Featuring among the adinkra symbols, it often has a curving “stem” as nyame nti (Willis 1998: 160).  This name means “by God’s grace,” as these leaves on a stalk stand for faith and trust in God.  Another motif more often has the straight stem found in the Indus sign: aya, “fern” (1998: 82).  It symbolizes endurance, independence, and perseverance in the face of difficulty.

Virtually the same symbol also appears in Australia, though often more elaborate in form.  It appears twice in the same panel, painted once in white and once in yellow at Bimba 2 Shelter, Olary region (Flood 1997: 202).  This is part of the Painted Panaramitee Tradition, found widely across the central region of the continent.  Layton also notes the motif among linear forms associates with ceremonial material (2009: 157).  Thus, this is most likely a universal motif, in one variation or another, but the meaning varies from one place to another.

Seal K-15 with inscription: VEST / FISH / BUD TOPPED DUBYA / DOUBLY CAGED DEE-SLASH / CORN HOLDER / BOWTIE / POT / COMB // CIRCLE WITH DOUBLE EARS AND FAT EX (?) BETWEEN ESSES / PRONG ON VEE & TRI-FORK IN DIAMOND (the status of the last-named symbol is uncertain -- is it 4 signs?).

The following sign may or may not be a variation of a previous sign, as well: BUD TOPPED DUBYA (XV 11).  Koskenniemi and Parpola note only a “dubya” with tops in the form of loops (KP117a) as does Fairservis (J-3).  Presumably they considered the type with doubled or tripled loops to be a variant.  Wells, however, lists this one independently (W321).  This particular variation occurs ony at Kalibangan (K-15).

Proto-cuneiform sign |(GI + GI) X GISZ @ t|, combining "reed" (x 2) and "tree."

In proto-cuneiform there is partly analogous ligature, |(GI + GI) X GISZ @ t|.  The GI element, which is repeated twice (rather than three times as in the Indus sign), came to mean “reed.”  The rectangular base, GISZ, could mean “tree, wood.”  The first element is sometimes repeated three times, |GI + GI + GI|, but not with the base.

Two Egyptian glyphs showing growing plants, M8, a lotus pool, and M20, reedy "marshland."

Egyptian also includes a tripled reed on a base, this time a simple horizontal line (M20).  It represents reeds growing, serving as an ideograph or determinative in sxt, “marshland.” 

Old Chinese wing1, "star," an analog that is not a plant (Wieger 1965: 205).

Old Chinese includes the character xing1, which also has three identical elements joined by a “dubya” form.  Rather than elaborated loops at the top, though, there are simple circles in this case.  In addition, the central vertical extends below the “dubya” and is crossed by two horizontal lines.  The character is not a plant now, but means “star.”  Interestingly, Luwian uses almost the same symbol (minus the two horizontal strokes at the bottom) for the syllable nu.

Broken seal K-53 with single-sign inscription: STRIPED LEAF OVER TRIPLE TRIANGLES.

The twelfth sign in this group is a ligature: STRIPED LEAF OVER TRIPLE TRIANGLES (XV 12), elsewhere found as KP113 and W430.  It occurs once, at Kalibangan (K-53), where it forms the whole inscription.  Fairservis might see this as a combination of his E-6 “head, high” and G-21 “dairy.”  Would that make XV 12 a “high dairy”?

Enigmatic sign on the end of Sb-2E, perhaps including TRIPLE TRIANGLES at the top (or is this an insect?).

This unusual sign bears some resemblance to another peculiar element found just once, at Sibri-damb (Sb2E).  This last sign is partly missing due to abrasion.  It might be reconstructed as containing the TRIPLE TRIANGLES, at the top this time.  On the other hand, the top could also be construed as similar to the top portion of the CARPET RAKE.

Proto-cuneiform sign LAM~b @ s, a distant parallel to Indus XV 12: "abundance."

There is a very distance resemblance to proto-cuneiform LAM~b @ s, which came to mean “abundance; to grow luxuriantly,” as well as “netherworld.”  Here, though, it is more the idea that is similar than the actual form.  The original top might represent plant life of some type, while the bottom has an overall triangular shape.  However, variants of this sign only maintain the stacked wedges, forming a triangle of sorts, while eliminating the “grain ears.”

Tablet H-216 with inscriptions: STRIPED FAT CHEVRON / STRIPED VEST / POT (A side); 3 POSTS / CUP (B side).

There follows a STRIPED VEST (XV 13), also known as KP309 (with 9 strokes), Fs L-1 (with 12 strokes), and W498.  Wells finds 17 occurrences, in three versions, only one of which has 15 strokes (his “c”).  This variant occurs at Harappa (H-216) and Mohenjo daro (M-372 and M-755).

Proto-Elamite signs resembling the Indus VEST: M206 (above) and M288 (below), the
latter a grain measure;M288 is identical to later Luwian tu4 (though rotated 90 degrees).

There is some resemblance between Indus sign XV 13 and the proto-cuneiform UD5 or ESZGAR.  The latter are highly stylized heads of goats, especially the female of the species.  As such, they typically has a rounded portion rather than the square base of the Indus sign.  Proto-Elamite also includes two “vest”-like signs (M206~g and M288).  The latter is a container for grain, with the designation GUR borrowed from proto-cuneiform (Damerow and Englund 1989: 43-46).  It probably functions as a measure.  For some reason, it also looks very much like the Luwian hieroglyphf or the syllable tu4.

Plaque from Tepe Yahya, Iran, depicting two buildings, one resembling the Indus "vest" (Potts 2001: 223, fig. 9.10).

Fairservis considers the Indus sign to represent cloth, but the symbol is rather like one of the buildings depicted on a plaque from Tepe Yahya in Iran (Potts 2001: 223, fig. 9.10).  The roof is curved, in this case, unlike the triangular indentation of the Indus sign.  But the overall resemblance remains.

Three depictions of butterflies, from Teotihuacan, Mexico (Van Dinter 2006: 187).

There is even a slight resemblance to butterflies, as depicted at Teotihuacan, in Central America (Van Dinter 2006: 187).  It does not seem likely that butterflies would be as schematically depicted as Indus sign XV 13 suggests, however.

The following sign is another “fat lambda” type, striped in this case (XV 14).  I gave it another term, STRIPED DOOR AND KNOB because it stands upright rather than leaning.  But this is also true of some instances of LAMBDA.  In any case, it appears elsewhere as KP200 (with 13 strokes), Fs G-22 (with 14 strokes), and W519.  Wells notes two occurrences from Mohenjo daro.

Another BI-FORK TOPPED HAIR PICK is next (XV 15).  It stands in the list at this point due to Wells’ variant “e.”  It seems to me that he has not shown it quite the way it appears in the photograph, however (L-90).

Seal M-112 with inscription: FOOTED ASTERISK / EXIT / POTTED ONE / LEAF /
STACKED 6 / DOT IN FISH / BI-FORK TOPPED POT / POT.

The sixteenth symbol is FOOTED ASTERISK (XV 16), shown only in Wells’ list (W555).  It occurs once at Mohenjo daro (M-112).  Apparently, Koskenniemi and Parpola group it with the FOOTED EX.

Another FOOTED STOOL WITH HAIRY LEGS AND ATTACHED TRI-FORK appears here (XV 17).  It does not contain 15 strokes in all of the published lists.  The precise stroke count depends on just how it is drawn.  I do not think it necessary to say more, since I discussed it previously.

There is then another singleton: FAT EX WITH ATTACHED TRI-FORK (XV 18), also known as KP258 and W550.  It is another motif from Mohenjo daro.

Broken seal H-572 with partial inscription: CAGED TRI-FORK AND VEE IN DIAMOND / FISH UNDER CHEVRON.

The following sign is troublesome: CAGED TRI-FORK AND DOUBLE VEES IN DIAMOND (XV 19).  It appears here on the basis of KP391.  Wells notes the similar ligature of a diamond containing the usual single “V” with three prongs attached below (W397).  This combination is caged as well.  He notes that this occurs twice a Harappa (H-96 and H-572).  In the second case, one of the prongs attached to the base of the internal “V” extends all the way to the edge of the enclosing diamond.  Perhaps this is the origin of KP391.  If not, I do not find the symbol in the Corpus.

There is some resemblance to Luwian ku, a diamond with “V” shaped elements at the right and left sides, as well as two vertical strokes down the center.  Except for the presence of marks inside a diamond, there seems to be little to commend this parallel.

Detail from copper ingot (?) K-122A with inscription: CIRCLED VEE / VEE & STACKED 9 (?) IN RECTANGLE / (?)
(note that I see zigzagging lines rather than a stacked numeral, but this could be interpreted more than one way).

The last of the 15-stroke signs is VEE AN STACKED NINE IN RECTANGLE (XV 20).  It appears only in the list of Koskenniemi and Parpola (KP396).  But it may occur in the Corpus, though just once on a copper object from Kalibangan (K-122A).  My own perception is three zigzag lines along with the “V,” not the discontinuous marks of a “stacked nine.”

Egyptian goddess Nephthys on a pectoral from King Tut's tomb; she wears the glyphs for her name on her head,
with the basket nb on top, "lady," over a rectangle enclosing a "V" shape, hwt, "palace," a small loaf inside
for t (based on a postcard).

Rectangles enclosing additional marks occur widely.  In Egyptian hieroglyphs, the long rectangular pool sometimes includes zigzag lines to represent water (cf. N37 and N38).  The “V” shape appears in a very different glyph, namely O6, the ideograph in hwt “castle, mansion, temple.”  This glyph is part of the name of the goddess Nephthys.  Other square or rectangular glyphs include O11, “palace”; O36, “wall”; Q3 “stool of reed matting” (only enclosing marks in some variations); T38, a butcher’s block appearing in “under”; and W12, the Old Kingdom version of the ring stand for jars.

Luwian glyph DOMUS, "house," an angular element enlosing additional
marks; does this suggest Indus XV 20 is a house?

Proto-cuneiform also includes more than one rectangle.  With many dots inside, it is SIG2~d4, “hair; wool; fur.”  With parallel lines at top and bottom, resembling fringe, it is MES, “young man; prince; son; hackberry tree.”  Luwian hieroglyphs also include rectangles.  One with two semi-circles on either side is DOMUS, “house.”  With a single circle in the center, its significance remains unknown (sign 255).  With two horizontal strokes crossing the center, it is PORTA, “door.”

Rock art motifs from Texas, including two retangles with details (Newcomb and Kirkland 1996: Pl. 40).

Decorated rectangles are part of the repertoire in American rock art, as shown by the paired symbols resembling fringed rugs (Newcomb and Kirkland 1996: 42, Pl. 10, no. 1).  They also occur in Africa, including depictions of ritually significant bags on the great overhang of Sango at Sanga in Mali (Le Quellec 2004: 60-61, fig. 6).  In Zambia, a rectangle with enclosures sometimes also has an “L” shaped extension on one side (2004: 68, fig. 16).  This symbol represents a supernatural being called a ginyu, with the “L” shaped element its arm.  Such a meaning could not be guessed at by a naive observer, it is worth noting.  Only a member of the culture that produced such a symbol would know this.  Such may be the case with many Indus symbols as well.

Depiction of a ginya from the overhang at Sanga, Mali, a supernatural being (Le Quellec 2004: 60, fig. 6).

REFERENCES

Cambel, H. 1999. Corpus of Hieroglyphic Inscriptions. Vol. II. Karatepe-Aslantas. New York: Walter de Gruyter.

Damerow, P. and R. Englund. 1989. The Proto-Elamite Texts from Tepe Yahya. Cambridge: Harvard University, Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology.

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

Flood, J. 1997. Rock Art of the Dreamtime: Images of Ancient Australia. Sydney: Angus and Robertson.

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

Heizer, R.F. and M.A. Baumhoff. 1984. Prehistoric Rock Art of Nevada and Eastern California. Berkeley: University of California.

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

Keyser, J.D. 1992. Indian Rock Art of the Columbia Plateau. Seattle: University of Washington.

Korvink, M.P. 2007. The Indus Script: A Positional Statistical Approach. Gilund (amazon.com).

Layton, R. 2009. Australian Rock Art: A Synthesis. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Le Quellec, J.-L. 2004. Rock Art in Africa: Mythology and Legend. Paris: Flammarion.

Newcomb, W.W., Jr. and F. Kirkland. 1996. The Rock Art of Texas Indians. Austin: University of Texas.

Potts, D.T. 2001. "Reflections on the Production of Chlorite at Tepe Yahya: 25 Years Later," in Excavations at Tepe Yahya, Iran 1967-1975: The Third Millennium, C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, ed. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, pp. 209-230.

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. 1998. An Introduction to Indus Writing: A Thesis. (see also 2011. Epigraphic Approaches to Indus Writing. Oxford and Oakville: Oxbow Books.)

Wieger, L. 1965. Chinese Characters. Transl. L. Davrout. New York: Paragon and Dover (orig. 1927).

Willis, W.B. 1998. The Adinkra Dictionary: A Visual Primer on the Language of Adinkra. Washington DC: The Pyramid Complex.

Dubious Circles and More Harappan Fish Signs

Among the rare Indus signs, there is a RAYED CIRCLE or, more accurately, a pointed oval with four diagonal rays protruding from it in a symmetrical pattern.  I enumerate this sign VI66 as the sixty-sixth of the six-stroke symbols.  Elsewhere it is known as KP358 and W356; Fairservis does not list it.  Wells finds five of these, three at Mohenjo daro, two at Harappa.  I think that there may be two more from Mohenjo daro, although the instance by itself on a pot is not quite identical (M-1627).

Indus seal H-131 with inscription: CUP ON FOUR PRONGS (?) / RAYED CIRCLE / BATTERY /
STRIPED MALLET / BI-QUOTES // STACKED TWELVE / CUPPED SPOON / THREE POSTS /
FISH / BELTED FISH / OVERLAPPING CIRCLES / TWO POSTS / POT (reworked by author).
Note that at 13 signs, this is one of the longest inscriptions.

Note that the Harappan RAYED CIRCLE is not only identical side to side, but top to bottom.  Symbols comprising circles with various numbers of rays occur in many cultures, but one with quadrilateral symmetry such as this is certainly not universal.  Among Egyptian hieroglyphs, a circle typically adorned with three rays appears (N8).  Both as a glyph and as a pictorial element in artwork, this represents the sun and the rays extend from the lower half only, i.e., downward.  In contrast, the RAYED CIRCLE among Indus symbols has two rays extending upward and two downward.

Depiction of the sun from poster for 1979 King Tut exhibit.
It is based on the depiction on the back of one of the king's chairs.
Note rays extend downward only and this sun has a uraeus, sign of kingship
(the latter element not found in the simpler hieroglyph).

Old Chinese includes a character that is circular in some variants, with four “rays.”  This is dai3, “bones fallen to pieces; what remains definitively of a man’s skeleton....By extension, death, misfortune, evil, bad, to break to pieces, to shatter, to grind, fragments, dust” (Wieger 1967: 275).  The character, unlike the Indus sign, is only truly symmetrical from top to bottom, not side to side.  In another variant of the same character, the symmetry is from side to side but not top to bottom.  No variant seems to show all four sides symmetrically.

Proto-cuneiform does have such a sign in EZEN, which came to mean “festival, feast.”  In this sign, the “rays” are either small triangles or small rectangles, unlike the simple lines of the Indus RAYED CIRCLE.  In addition, in the proto-cuneiform variants the “rays” are positioned differently.  If this were a clock, the rectangles/triangles appear at 12 o’clock and 6 o’clock, 3 o’clock and 9 o’clock.  In contrast, the Indus sign has “rays” midway between these points.

Proto-Elamite includes both types.  One sign closely resembles EZEN, except that the central circle is an impression, made by the end of a stylus (M327).  This sign has rectangles rather than linear rays.  Another proto-Elamite sign is characterized by triangles disposed in the same manner around the circular impression (M365).  Each triangular “ray” has its base against the central circle, while the proto-cuneiform EZEN variant displays each triangle with the apex against the central circle.  In an additional third proto-Elamite sign, triangular “rays” are again displayed around a circular impression, but this time in the four diagonal positions seen in the Indus sign (M365~a).  Also, there are two vertical lines passing through the center of the sign.

In Africa, the Adinkra symbols of Ghana include a motif that superficially resembles the Indus RAYED CIRCLE (Willis 1998: 154).  Here, the circle contains a diamond, and there are four oval rays.  The sign is called sunsum, “soul,” conveying concepts of spirituality and purity.  Elsewhere in Africa, rayed circles appear among the symbols engraved in cemeteries at Namoratunga, Kenya (Le Quellec 2004: 131).  Some of these continue in use among local people as cattle brands, indicating clan ownership.  I find three circles with rays in this group, one with two descending prongs, one with three (identical to the Egyptian glyph), and the last one with six all around.  None has just four.  The story is much the same across the continent.  Circular motifs adorned with varying types, numbers, and positions of rays are widespread, but it is most difficult to find one exactly like the Indus RAYED CIRCLE. 

Navaho sky motifs from center of sand painting: blue sun, white moon,
yellow and black winds.  Each is circular, with a feather above, horns on each
side, and "rainbows" beneath (Newcomb and Reichard 1975: Plate II).

In North America, parallels are more frequent.  In their corpus of engraved motifs, Heizer and Baumhoff note 100 occurrences of rayed circles (referred to as “sun discs”) from Nevada, 15 from eastern California (1984: 77, 304).  Examples with four diagonal rays such as the Indus sign possesses are relatively infrequent, but do occur (e.g., 1984: 167, fig. 104b; p. 192, fig. 129h; p. 355, fig. F-16e).  The sand paintings of the Navaho contain a number of motifs characterized by quadrilateral symmetry.  These typically show a central circle with some element attached at top, bottom, and right and left sides, the same arrangement as proto-cuneiform EZEN.  In one sand painting, for example, the sun is represented as such a circle with four rays above, four below, and four at each side (Newcomb and Reichard 1975: Pl. II).  Such a motif colored differently is the moon, and others the winds.  Instead of four straight lines, sometimes the “rays” are zigzags, which can represent rain.  Elsewhere, a central circle with four triangles attached, each apex toward the center, represents a water vessel from which four plants grow: corn, squash, bean, and tobacco.  Quadrilateral symmetry appears in all of these and is generally a feature of this genre.

Hohokam anthropomorphic figures, that above somewhat resembling the
"bedside rug" type with circular center and limbs plus head as rays.  This
scene may depict a birth (Wallace 1991: 65).

In Texas, some motifs closely resemble the Navaho astral bodies, sun and moon, as just described.  These Texan motifs often appear alongside anthropomorphic figures which are identified by various authors as shamans.  The “rayed circles” are then identified as shields held by the shamans.  Sometimes the “rays” extending from these “shields” are in the top-bottom and right-left positions, as in the Navaho sand paintings (e.g., Newcomb and Kirkland 1997: 39, Pl. 9, no. 1; p. 116, Pl. 74; p. 147, Pl. 98, no. 3).  At other times, the motif has diagonal “rays,” as does the Indus sign (e.g., 1997: 87, Pl. 48, no. 5).

Another type of motif, which may or may not be related, is essentially pictorial.  The central circle represents the body of a human or animal, with two legs descending and two arms plus the head protruding above.  Such a motif occurs in Africa, where it probably represents a lizard (Le Quellec 2004: 61, fig. 6, on the overhang of Sango at Sanga, Mali).  This author refers to the motif as the “bedside rug type” of zoomorph (in contrast to the silhouette form of figure, which typically depicts the animal from the side).  In the American Southwest, the Hohokam engraved a similar “bedside rug” figure that most likely represents a human (Wallace 1991: 65).  In Australia, such a motif may depict a turtle (Flood 1997: 107, at Yunta Springs).

Indus seal C-1 (detail) with inscription: FOUR POSTS / EGG ON NEST (?) / FAT LEG LAMBDA /
BI-QUOTES // HORNED MAN BETWEEN CEES / HORNED MAN / POT // LOOP ARMED MAN
WITH SLASH / OVERLAPPING CIRCLES / POST (?).  Signs are difficult to make out on original.
I have cleaned up some of the details but interpretation of EGG ON NEST is open to question.

In contrast to the many analogs to VI66, Indus sign VI67 has almost none.  It is a loop resembling a finless fish, but with its tail fins upward.  Two prongs descend from the base of this loop and there is a short stroke attached to one of the “tail fins.”  There are actually several signs like this, each based on this type of loop, the different signs distinguished by the number of prongs below (0-4) plus the number of additional strokes added to one or another “tail fin” (1-3).  I have tentatively assigned them all the arbitrary name, EGG ON NEST, with the number of prongs beneath indicated in parentheses.  Hence, sign VI66 is EGG ON NEST (2).  This particular version occurs elsewhere only as W184.  Wells identifies it as a singleton from Chanhujo daro (C-1).

We can compare it to a different variant of the Old Chinese character cited previously, dai3.  This character resembles the letter “A” with a rounded top, above which rises an attached vertical and, to this, a still shorter horizontal stroke.  Some of the “shield” symbols of Nevada, in the American Southwest, are reminiscent of the Indus sign also.  But it require considerable imagination to see either of these parallels.  It may be justifiable to conclude, then, that the EGG ON NEST form is unique to the Indus script.

On the other hand, close examination of the single seal on which the Indus VI67 occurs gives reason to doubt the validity of this sign.  I tend to think that at least this version of this peculiar motif is actually a variant of the BIRD.  Some of the apparent birds depicted in the Indus script have legs toward the side, some have a stroke or two at the base to indicate a tail, and one has a stroke on the head, representing a feathery crest.  Such an analysis would explain the EGG ON NEST forms that stand on three prongs (two strokes for legs and one for a tail), as well as those with four prongs (two legs again, but with two strokes for a tail).  Sign VI67 lacks a tail, perhaps.  However, this analysis does not account for the elements at the top of the loop in most EGG ON NEST forms.  On this point, evidence from seal C-1 is equivocal about VI67, because the top is unclear.  But there are bits that suggest a bird’s head and not simply prongs.

Seal M-1228 with inscription: LOOP WITH EF PRONGS (?) / FAT LEG LAMBDA / SINGLE QUOTE.
Original is heavily scratched and interpretation is open to question.  I have highlighted the
elements I think comprise real signs, leaving others faint but still visible.

The next sign, LOOP WITH EF PRONGS, is enumerated VI68.  I do not think Wells correctly renders this and neither Fairservis nor Koskenniemi and Parpola include it.  It appears on a single seal which is quite scratched (M-1228).  It is my opinion that Wells has misread some of the scratches as part of the sign, which is simply the LOOP (my II10 and his W131), but upside-down (and note that there is an identical loop glyph in Egyptian, one variant with prongs above, another with prongs below).

Seal H-148 with inscription: FISH UNDER CHEVRON / WHISKERED FISH / SPEAR.

The following sign appears as KP62(a), W113, and Fs Q-5.  In my list it is VI69, the WHISKERED FISH.  This is one of the more common signs.  Wells notes it occurring 179 times, with 85 of these from Mohenjo daro, 78 from Harappa, six from Lothal, and two from Kalibangan (which seems to leave some unaccounted for).  This is one of the rare symbols that provides sufficient data for statistical analysis.

As such, Korvink so analyzes it as one of the five most frequent fish-like symbols (2007: 37).  They typically occur in the medial section rather than either the prefix or the terminal sections.  When there is more than type of “fish,” these generally occur in a standard sequence: (1) FISH UNDER CHEVRON, (2) FISH, (3) WHISKERED FISH, (4) DOT IN FISH, (5) SLASH IN FISH (the last combined in this analysis with BELTED FISH as variants of one sign).  No inscription has all of these, though up to three occur together.  In addition, the order violates this “rule” in more than a few cases (eight from Harappa; six from Mohenjo daro; one from Lothal).  Thus, the standard sequence posited by Korvink was apparently optional rather than required.

When it comes to meaning, Fairservis supposes the WHISKERED FISH to be a variant of the basic FISH.  He designates the latter as L-3, identifying it as a loop of thread, affixed by P-11, BI-QUOTES (a suffix).  He sees the FISH, in turn, as affixed by cattle horns, a feature also seen on the HORNED MAN (his A-4, which we have yet to discuss).  The definition Fairservis gives for this combination of three elements is “physician; madness, rage; be agitated; to tame,” and the sign represents either a religious functionary (a shaman or priest) or a tamer of cattle.  That is an astonishing collection of possibilities, to my way of thinking, and not convincing.

This proposal could not be any further from that put forth by Parpola (1994: 181-183 and 275-277).  He sees the various types of “fish” as depicting fishes.  Then, since the word for “fish” is homonymous with that for “star” in various Dravidian languages, he considers the FISH to mean “star” most of the time.  According to this interpretation, the fish-like signs demonstrate use of the rebus principle as a means for conveying phonetic information.  The principle of the rebus typically occurs when a pictorial symbol represents, not only what it depicts, but also a word or concept that is difficult to depict but sounds like it in the language of the symbol users.  For example, a rebus in English might use a drawing of an eye not only to mean “eye” but also “I,” a pronoun that sounds the same but whose meaning is hard to convey pictorially.

It seems to me that Parpola’s basic proposal requires us to assume that the Harappans never developed a symbol to actually represent a star.  However, the Harappans’ neighbors had no trouble doing so.  In what is now Iraq, the Sumerians and Babylonian had a star symbol, an “asterisk” with eight points.  The Egyptians had a glyph for a star as well, this one with five points. Neither writing system originally used the rebus for this concept.  There is an Old Chinese star too, although it is more complex.  Since each of these early writing systems came up with a way of writing “star” pictorially, it is difficult to believe that the Harappans should not have done the same, had they wished to symbolize a star.

Further, Parpola’s hypothesis requires that we not interpret any of the existing Indus symbols as a star.  But I can think of a  signs that might be such a symbol.  There is the five-pointed pentagram that looks like the modern Western star, my sign V20, STAR (a rare sign).  A second possibility is the six-pointed asterisk, my III19, ASTERISK (also rare).  A third possibility is the CARTWHEEL, my V43.  Unlike the first two signs, this one is frequent in inscriptions, occurring 125 times according to Wells.  This symbol’s use is widespread as well, with examples from Mohenjo daro, Harappa, Lothal, Kalibangan, Rangpur, Surkotada, and Nausharo.  I do not believe that we can be sure this sign is not a star.  Hence, Parpola’s most basic proposal remains unconvincing.

Be that as it may, it is interesting to examine fish-like symbols elsewhere.  Both proto-cuneiform (|SUKUD + SUKUD|) and proto-Elamite include examples (M281 and M282).  However, while both of these have “fins” on the sides and at the “tail,” neither has “whiskers.”  Egyptian hieroglyphs present almost the same pattern.  There are several fish glyphs representing different species, but none has whiskers.  The scarab or dung beetle is depicted from above and, in this view, has a pair of legs bent around the front end (L1).  These might be considered roughly equivalent to “whiskers.”  But that is stretching things.  Altogether, the glyph and the sign are not much alike.

The rock art of the American Southwest generally lacks depictions of fish, hardly surprising for this arid region.  Still, one engraving resembles a crab, a wide oval with two thick lines curving upward and four bending downward (Heizer and Baumhoff 1984: 355, fig. F-28a).  All of these protrude from the sides of the oval.  Tall ovals with descending side prongs are certainly anthropomorphic, some apparently horned (1984: 132, fig. 69c; p. 138, fig. 75b and d).

Indus seal M-129 with inscription: SQUARE AY / POTTED ONE / FISH UNDER CHEVRON/
WHISKERED FISH / BELTED FISH / SPEAR.  Note three different "fishes" occur together,
an indication that each conveys a distinct concept.

The next sign is FISH UNDER CHEVRON, VI70, also known as KP60, W114, and Fs Q-6.  Fairservis sees this as a ligature of the LOOP + BI-QUOTES plus a CHEVRON affix, somehow adding them up to “head or high chief.”  Parpola sees this as representing “black star” in Proto-Dravidian.  This expression refers to the planet Saturn in the modern language of Tamil.  Parpola projects the same expression for the same referent back in time to the ancestral language, a somewhat risky maneuver linguistically (2004: 275).  Wells does not attempt to define the sign, but notes 127 occurrences.  Of these, 84 are from Mohenjo daro, 34 from Harappa, five from Lothal, two from Chanhujo daro, and one from Lohumjo daro.

I see nothing comparable to this sign elsewhere.  In proto-cuneiform, one loop-shaped sign appears alongside an element resembling the letter “A” with a curved top.  In the broadest sense, this is similar to FISH UNDER CHEVRON, in that two otherwise independent elements occur together, and one is fish-like.  This is GIR2~b, which eventually had a variety of meanings: “cow or mare of intermediate age; sow; a fish, possibly a carangid.”  However, even in proto-cuneiform, the fish-like portion appears in other variants of GIR2 without the accompanying element.  In other words, the fishy part seems to mean “fish; female domestic animal” with or without the “affix.”  This does not seem to be the case in the Indus script, since two or more FISH signs occur together in the same inscription (i.e., an indication of differing concepts being attached to their use).

POTTED ONE / TRIPLY FINNED FISH / BUD / BI-QUOTES / FOUR QUOTES / TRI-FORK.
The signs on this seal (M-315) are clear, unlike those in which the DOUBLY FINNED FISH
supposedly appear.

The following sign, VI71, is the DOUBLY FINNED FISH.  As this name implies, there are two strokes on each side of the “fish” rather than just one.  It also appears as KP64 and W127, a rare sign that occurs twice according to Wells.  Due to the poor condition of the seal from Mohenjo daro, it is difficult to be certain of the reading, but this one does not appear to have doubled side fins (M-1027).  What Wells takes to be the beginning of a second fin on the preserved right side is only part of a crack, while the left side is not preserved.  The second occurrence, on a pot shard from Kalibangan (K-95), is broken at crucial points.  I believe it is a caged item.  That is, a “stacked two” occurs on the left, followed by DOUBLY FINNED FISH plus three short verticals, with another “stacked two” on the right.  Other caged motifs – whether composed of one or two signs” – appear in other lists as signs in their right, not sequences.  Thus, I would characterize this as CAGED DOUBLY FINNED FISH & THREE QUOTES, a 13-stroke sign.

This time, proto-cuneiform provides a reasonably good parallel with SUKUD@g~a.  This is somewhat fish-like and has three “fins” on each side.  It came to mean “height, depth,” a meaning that suggests it had nothing to do with fishes.  Proto-Elamite also includes a fish-like sign with doubled “fins” on the sides (M281~a).  This bears a small circular impression in the center, reminiscent of an eye.  Ovals with three prongs protruding from each side are counted among the 15 “sun discs” in the American Southwest (Heizer and Baumhoff 1984: 376, fig. F-37e).  At least some of these may represent insects (e.g., 1984: 304, fig. St-1 from Lagomarsino).

Another fish-like Indus sign is FISH BETWEEN POSTS, VI72.  Only Wells lists this one (W129).  He indicates only two of these, one from Mohenjo daro, the other from Harappa.  I see another from Harappa and one from Kot Diji as well, bringing the total to four (M-877, H-442 plus H-443 and Kd-7).

Seal H-443 with inscription: FISH BETWEEN POSTS / (?).  Final sign may be
SQUIRREL or it may be nothing but scratches.

In proto-cuneiform, the fish, KU6, appears inside a circle, which is LAGAB, a composite sign noted as |LAGAB~a x KU6~a|.  The later meanings of these individual elements include “stone” and “fish.”  Perhaps together they indicate a fish carved of stone (or a cow carved from wood)?  The only other example of a possible “enclosed fish” symbol occurs in Nevada (Heizer and Baumhoff 1984: 147, fig. 84b).  In this case, one of the fish-like horned humans is enclosed in an irregular oval along with a zigzag and a diagonal stroke.  Admittedly, this is not much of a parallel.

The last of this type is FISH BETWEEN PARENTHESES, VI73.  Like the previous sign, it occurs elsewhere only in Wells, where it is W130.  Wells sees two, one from Mohenjo daro and one from Lothal.  In my own database, I find a “fish” bracketed by parentheses from the first city, but there is also an “ear” element attached.  As an eight-stroke sign, this should not be included here.  Wells cites L-82 for the second instance, on which only a FISH and BACK CEE are actually visible (i.e., no CEE at the beginning to create full parentheses).  Since the CEE occurs both alone and along with another (or a BACK CEE), I think we cannot assume there was originally another element, now missing.  A dim and heavily abraded sign on C-6 from Chanhujo daro may be the single actual occurrence VI73.  Alternatively, this may be another instance with an “ear.”

Seal L-82 with inscription: FISH / BACK CEE / BI-QUOTES // DOT IN FISH / CIRCLED TRI-FORK.
Wells sees CEE at far left; I do not.

In proto-cuneiform, one sign is sometimes bracketed by another, as in |NINDA2 x HI|.  Here, a diamond lies between two bent lines.  The bracketing element is NINDA2, whose later meanings include “bushel measuring vessel.”  The diamond is HI, which came to mean “to mix; mixed, averaged.”  Together, they may represent a vessel with mixed contents.

ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

Wallace, Henry. 1991. “Pictures in the Desert” in The Hohokam: Ancient People of the Desert, David Grant Noble, ed. Santa Fe, New Mexico: School of American Research. Pp. 62-73.