Harappan 'non-texts'

L.S.Cousins selwyn at NTLWORLD.COM
Mon Jul 3 05:32:30 UTC 2000


The problem with Steve Farmer's argument here is that it is basically
an argument from silence. Indian archaeology is far less developed
than most of the other areas mentioned, both in quality and in
quantity. You tend to get a rather simplistic view in that situation.
More excavation and more data is likely to complicate the picture.

So it is perfectly possible that writing was used in some more
complex ways. It is equally possible that it wasn't. It is also quite
possible that it was used for more things we than now have evidence,
but remained restricted; e.g. it might not have been used in
religious contexts.

In the circumstances it would seem pretty stupid to get dogmatic about it.

Lancxe Cousins
--
HEADINGTON, UK

CURRENT EMAIL ADDRESS:
selwyn at ntlworld.com





More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list