Recent Work on the Indus Civilization Author(s): A. L.

Basham Source: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 13, No. 1 (1949), pp. 140-145 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of School of Oriental and African Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/609067 . Accessed: 09/02/2011 05:56
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and School of Oriental and African Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.

http://www.jstor.org

Recent Work on the Indus Civilization

By A. L. BASHAM AMONG a bewildering mass of archaeologicalreports and learned papers the small book of the late Dr. Ernest Mackay, The Indus Civilization, published in 1935, has provided an excellent concise outline of the subject. It has now been reissued under a significantly amended title,l with revisions and additions by the author's widow. New maps and illustrations have also been added. Since 1935 further researches have considerably modified our earlier view of the Indus culture. The excavations at Chanhu-daro,conducted by Dr. Mackay for the American School of Indic and Iranian Studies 2 have shown that the culture of which the Harappa remains are the type was superseded, in this part of Sind at any rate, by later intrusive cultures, those of Jhukar and Jhangar (p. 3). Advances in Mesopotamian chronology have permitted a closer estimate of the date of the abandonment of the Indus cities. This, it appears, took place at about the same time as the end of the first Babylonian dynasty, which, on the most recent evidence, must be placed as late as the sixteenth century B.C. (p. 157). It has been conclusively shown that we may no longer retain the rather utopian picture suggested by reports of earlier excavations, which seemed to reveal an affluent commercial people, living in comfort and security in unfortified cities, and free from the oppressions of a theocratic government such as ruled in contemporary Sumer and Egypt. Dr. Mackay and all serious archaeologists doubted the accuracy of this picture. In the first edition of The Indus Civilizationit was pointed out that the control of such well-planned cities as Mohenjo-daro and Harappa demanded a highly organized government, that the excavations had not been completed, and that further work on the sites might reveal fortresses and royal palaces. It was also suggested that the comparative scarcity of weapons among the remains might be accounted for by the ancient forts discovered in Baluchistan by the late Dr. N. G. Majumdar, which were probably frontier posts of the Indus people. Dr. Mackay's suspicions have been borne out by the latest discoveries on the Harappa site, where Prof. R. E. MortimerWheeler has found remains which are unquestionably those of a well-fortifiedcitadel. There is little doubt that similar evidence of a strong governmental machine at Mohenjo-darowill emerge when the stuipa mound is excavated. It now seems certain that the pattern of the Indus political system was similar to that of Sumer-a priest-king governing a servile population through a rigid bureaucracy (p. xii).
1 Early Indus Civilizations, by Ernest Mackay, 2nd edition, revised and enlarged by Dorothy Mackay. pp. xiv + 169, with maps and illustrations. London: Luzac and Co. Price 17s. 6d. 2 E. Mackay, Chanhu-daroExcavations, New Haven, 1943.

RECENT WORK ON THE INDUS CIVILIZATION

141

Mrs. Mackay has taken account of the above additions to our knowledge, but has perhaps been a little over-cautious in her treatment of the new material, and may not have given sufficient attention to the theoretical work carried out since 1935. From the first discovery of the buried cities the student approaching the Indus civilization from the direction of India has asked three questions. Did the Indus people come into contact with the Vedic Aryans ? What language did they speak ? And how far has their culture influenced that of post-Vedic Hinduism ? On reading Mrs. Mackay's revision of Dr. Mackay's outline, he may feel that he is no nearer to a definite answer to his questions in 1948 than he was in 1935. Every student of ancient India learns to accept with gratitude provisional answers framed in terms of possibilities, where certainty cannot be reached, and the reader would have been grateful to Mrs. Mackay for further information on the more recent attempts to answer the three questions, which we consider below.
HAD THE INDUS PEOPLE CONTACT WITH THE ARYANS ?

Since the discovery of the Indus civilization the Sanskritist has tended to read certain Vedic words in a new light. Thus, the word pur 1 had been interpreted as a mere hill fort of earthworks, logs, or boulders, erected by the primitive enemies of the Aryans. Such an explanation was satisfactory on the assumption that the native inhabitants of the Panjab were comparative savages, at a considerably lower stage of culture than the semi-nomadic Aryan invaders. But on this hypothesis the fact that the Vedic poet was capable of conceiving the abode of the gods Mitra and Varun.aas a thousandpillared hall2 was hard to explain, even after making the greatest possible allowance for poetic exaggeration. The revelation of the Indus cities tended to encourage the obvious conclusion that pur in the Rg Veda denoted a town, as did pura in classical Sanskrit, and that the hundred purs destroyed by Indra included Harappa and perhaps Mohenjo-daroin their number. At the time of the publication of Sir John Marshall's great report on Mohenjo-daro3 and of the first edition of Dr. Mackay's book, the archaeologistsgave no confirmation of this attractive theory. Their evidence pointed rather to the opposite conclusion-that a considerable time elapsed between the end of the Indus culture and the Aryan occupation. Only Professor V. Gordon Childe tentatively admitted the possibility that Harappa, at least, fell to the Aryans.4
" Indra 1 E.g. Satdm asmanmdyinadmpuram Indro vi dsiat Divoddsaya ddaise. R.V.iv.30.20. overthrew a hundred purs made of stone for Divodisa his worshipper." Vide Macdonnell and Keith, Vedic Index, s.v. pur. 2 Rdjanav dnabhidruhadhruve sddasi uttame Sahdsrasthiznadsdte. R.V.ii.41.5. " Both kings, unharming, sit in their firm supreme thousand-pillared abode ", c.f. R.V.v.62.6. 3 Sir J. Marshall, E. Mackay, and others: Mohenjo-daroand the Indus Civilization, London, 1931. 4 V. Gordon Childe: New Light on the Most Ancient East, London, 1934, p. 223.

142

A. L. BASHAM-

The present edition of Dr. Mackay's book adds little to the earlier view. The broken statuettes at Mohenjaro-daro were "smashed .. .by people who regarded the worship of such figures as idolatrous or hostile to their own beliefs; and as it [the smashing of the statuettes] may have taken place before the arrival of the Aryan-speaking people who invaded India about 1500 B.c., it is possible that some of the hill people of Baluchistan were responsible for this damage " (p. 56). Of the Jhukar culture, which superseded that of Harappa at Chanhu-daro,we are merely told that " the possibility of the Jhukar people being forerunners of the Aryan invaders has to be considered " (p. 5). And yet latest developments in Mesopotamianchronology would " bring the end of the Harappa cities to well into the sixteenth century B.C." (p. 157). Mrs. Mackay is too cautious to make any but the most selfevident inference. "This latter dating ", she writes, "would, it might be pointed out, bring the Jhukar culture ... into close proximity in time to the coming of the Aryan-speaking peoples to North-West India " (p. 157). Mrs.Mackaymentions Prof. Wheeler's latest report in her bibliography, and refers to his work on the Harappa citadel; but she seems not to recognize the full significance of the exhumations at Cemetery R37. She mentions the unique coffin burial (p. 73), but does not make it clear that this was only one of the ten burials examined by Prof. Wheeler, and that these ten were but a sample of the contents of Cemetery R37, where about fifty burials have already been uncovered.2 In the light of these new discoveries Dr. Mackay's view " that the Harappa people usually cremated their dead on the banks of the river and that the ashes were then thrown into the water " (p. 74), should surely have been qualified by his editor. Prof. Wheeler recognizes the importance of the second Harappa cemetery, known as Cemetery H, where fractional urn-burials of the people of a later intrusive culture have been exhumed. His latest discoveries lead him to approve Professor Gordon Childe's suggestion that these people were Aryans; in fact, his report does attempt at least a tentativ. answer to the first of our questions. In the preface he writes: "if we may go furthei . .. and, in the light of the new evidence, associate the fall of Harappa with the protohistoric advent of the Aryans, the Harappa civilization at last becomes an integral episode in the story of the Indian peoples. But in the present state of our knowledge no undue stress is laid upon that possibility." 3 Though he opens on this note of caution, Prof. Wheeler presents a good case for the theory that the occupants of Cemetery H were Aryans. After reinforcing his argument with numerous Vedic references he writes: "What destroyed this firmly settled civilization ? ... On circumstantial evidence Indra stands accused ... Nevertheless, Indra's hostile citadels may be represented not by the Harappan cities but by
1 R. E. M. Wheeler: " Harappa 1946: The Defences and Cemetery R37 ", Ancient India, no. 3, January 1947, p. 58 ff. 2 Wheeler: op. cit., p. 83 ff. 8 Ibid., p. 59.

RECENT WORK ON THE INDUS CIVILIZATION

143

others yet unknown to us. If so, we have to assume that in the short interval which can, at the most, have intervened between the end of Harappa and the first Aryan invasions, an unidentified but formidable civilization arose in the same region and presented a fortified front to the invaders. The assllmption is not an easy one." 1
THE LANGUAGE OF THE INDUS PEOPLE

The answers given to the second of our questions have been so tentative and varied that possibly Mrs. Mackay is rather to be commended than blamed for having touched so lightly on the interpretation of the Indus script. But perhaps she does less than justice to the men who have tried to read it when she writes that " considerable ingenuity has been applied to the problem of its decipherment " (p. 158). Among the numerous students, English, Indian, Hungarian, Czech, Italian, and Spanish, who have undertaken exhaustive studies of the seal-inscriptions, she selects only Father Heras, S.J., for a brief reference. In a short survey such as this one would scarcely expect a mention of the first bold but unfortunate attempt at a reading on the analogy of Sumerian by Dr. L. A. Waddell,2 or of Dr. C. J. Gadd's claim to have traced the Sanskrit word putra in the inscriptions.3 Early efforts by Dr. Pran Nath 4 now seem 5 universally discredited. But Dr. G. R. Hunter's careful analysis and Dr P. 6 Meriggi's cautious effort at interpretation are surely as deserving of mention as the fantastic translations of Father Heras, which are probably only so well known because their very respected author has himself such complete confidence in them.7 Dr. De Hevesy's discovery of the striking similarity between the Indus script and the Easter Island pictographs, which has convinced such authorities as Professor Langdon, Professor de la Vallee Poussin, and Dr. C. L. Fabri, is surely worthy of mention 8: and at least the work of so eminent a figure as Professor Bedrich Hrozny should not go unnoticed. Mrs. Mackay makes
op. cit., p. 82. L. A. Waddell: Indo-Sumerian Seals Deciphered, London, 1925. 3 Marshall: op. cit., pp. 406-414. 4 Actes du XVIIIe. CongresInternational des Orientalistes,Leiden, 1932, p. 145; v. C. L. Fabri "Latest Attempts to Read the Indus Script ", Indian Culture, i, 1934, p. 52. 5 G. R. Hunter, The Script of Mohenjo-daro,London, 1934. 6 P. Meriggi, " Zur Indusschrift ", ZDMG., 12, 1934, p. 198 ff. This and the preceding monograph are quoted in the bibliography of Early Indus Civilizations, but ignored in the text. Father Heras, on the other hand, is mentioned in the text, but ignored in the bibliography. 7 H. Heras, "The Religion of the Mohenjo-daro People According to the Inscriptions ", Journal of the University of Bombay, v, 1936, p. 1 ff. Fr. Heras' latest pronouncements on the Indus script are apparently to be found in Spanish: "La Escritura Protoindico y su Desciframento ", Ampurias, i, Barcelona, 1940, p. 5 ff. The journal Ampurias is not apparently available in the British Museum Library, and I quote the reference from Hrozny, op. cit. A further Spanish effort at interpretation has recently been published: J. Q. Vives, Aportaciones a la Interpretacion de la Escritura Protoindica, Barcelona. 8 G. de Hevesy, " Sur une l]criture Oceanienne ", Bull. de la Soc. PrehistoriqueFrancaise, nos. 7-8, 1933. Also " Osterinselschrift und Indusschrift ", OLZ., 1934, p. 665 ff.
1Wheeler:
2

144

A. L. BASHAM-

no mention of the fact that during the war the pioneer interpreter of the Hittite hieroglyphs presented the world with a tentative reading of the Indus seals.' Professor Hrozny's interpretation of the inscriptions, on a syllabic basis and on the analogy of Hittite, bristles with difficulties and improbabilities; for instance, he finds some fifty homophonous signs for the syllable sa or ji.2 But his translations of the seal-legends seem at least more plausible than the strange readings proposed by Dr. Meriggiand Fr. Heras. His conclusions on the nature of the language are startling; unlike Meriggi and Heras, who find the language of the seals to be " Proto-Dravidian ", he thinks it to be an Indo-European tongue of the centum group.3 Whatever the conclusions may be after the discovery of a bilingual inscription, or of one of sufficient length to afford a definitive interpretation, in the present state of our knowledge the views which Professor Hrozny puts forward so confidently should be mentioned even in a brief outline such as Early Indus Civilizations.
SURVIVALS OF THE INDUS CULTURE

To our third question the archaeologistis more ready with his answers. Few authorities would disagree with Sir John Marshall's recognition of many elements of later Hinduism in the Mohenjo-daro and Harappa remains; but it is to be noted that some of his identifications have not passed unchallenged. For instance, Prof. F. O. Schrader has thrown some doubt on his identification of " Proto-Siva" in the famous seal depicting a god seated cross-legged among animals.4 Prof. Schrader goes so far as to doubt even the humanity of the god's head, and questions the three faces which Sir John Marshall attributes to him.5 On the other hand he finds striking similarities between this figure and that of the Celtic god Cernunnos, as depicted on a silver cauldron unearthed at Gundestrup, in Denmark. Dr. Mackay mentions without comment the theory of the late Professor Langdon and Dr. Hunter, that the Indus script is the parent of the Brahmi alphabet (p. 1). It should, however, be noted that this too has been contested 6 by Dr. Fabri and by Professor Hrozny who, in his work on the Indus script, dismisses it perhaps too contemptuously.7 Although some parallels are certainly questionable, Marshall's main theory
1 B. Hrozn', " Inschrift und Kultur der Protoinder von Mohenjo-daro und Harappa ", Archiv Orientalns, Prague, 1941, p. 192 ff., and 1942, p. 1 ff. See also: Die Alteste Geschichte Vorderasiensund Indiens, Prague, 1943. 2 Die Alteste GeschichteVorderasiensund Indiens, p. 205. 3 ibid., p. 203. a F. Otto Schrader: "Indische Beziehungen eines Nordischen Fundes ", ZDMG., 1934, pp. 185 ff. 5 "4 Sein Gesicht ... eher als ein menschlichesscheint mir ein tierisches, etwa das eines Tigers zu zein. Dass der Gott dreigesichtig ist... kann ich nicht finden. Der nasenartige Vorsprung an beiden Seiten des Gesichteskonnte eine Haarstrahne sein . . ." 6 " Latest Attempts to read the Indus Script," Indian Culture, I, 1934, p. 52. 7 "Inschriften und Kultur der Proto-Inder," Archiv Orientalns, 1941, p. 195; Die Alteste Geschichte... p. 197.

RECENT WORK ON THE INDUS CIVILIZATION

145

still holds good, and has never been seriously questioned. Much may yet be done in tracing less obvious survivals of elements of the Indus culture in later India, and some recent efforts have been made by Indian students along these lines.' A small but interesting contribution has recently been presented by Prof. Wilhelm Koppers, as a by-product of his researches among the Bhils and Gonds.2 The focus of the fertility rites of these people is a magic stand or table, on which earth is laid and corn sown at the beginning of the ceremonies. The corn is allowed to grow for nine days, after which the table is carried in procession to the village watering-place, where it is ceremonially immersed. This table Prof. Koppers connects with the mysterious cult-object frequently depicted on the Indus seals in conjunction with a sacred bull. Numerous suggestions have been put forward as to the nature of this strange article; it has been an incense-burner, an altar, and a manger; even a bird-cage on a pedestal has been suggested. Prof. Koppers believes that it actually represents a magic table similar to that used by the Gonds, and strengthens his argument by pointing out that on three seals small parallel lines are to be seen emerging from the surface of the object 3; these, he believes, represent the growing corn. There are also two representations of such an object being carried in a religious procession.4 While the table used by the Gonds, as depicted in his illustrations, does not strikingly resemble that of the seals, Prof. Koppers makes quite a strong case for his theory. Meanwhile, the student of Indian History and Culture waits on the archaeologistfor more definite answers to his three questions. The partition of India must not be allowed to impede the excavations so unfortunately slowed down and interrupted by financial crisis and war. Further digging in the Harappa citadel and the excavation of the Mohenjo-daro stupa mound will certainly produce fresh material, which will considerably modify our picture of India's earliest civilization. It is to be hoped that new discoveries will soon compel Mrs. Mackay to undertake a third edition of Dr. Mackay's invaluable work.
1 E.g. Aravamuthan, Some Survivals of the Harappa Culture, Bombay, 1942. B. M. Barua, "The Indus Script and the Tantric Code ", Indo-Iranica, i, 1946. 2 W. Koppers, " Zentralindische Fruchtbarkeitsriten und ihre Beziehungen zur Induskultur ", GeographiaHelvetica, i, 1946, vol. 2, p. 165 ff. 3 E.g. Marshall, op. cit., vol. iii, plate civ, no. 38. 4 Ibid., vol. iii, plate cxvi, nos. 5 and 8.

VOL. XIII.

PART 1.

12