Harappan 'non-texts' (& more for V. Roebuck)

[Steve Farmer]

L.S. Cousins writes, re my argument that there were no extended
Harappan texts:

> The problem with Steve Farmer's argument here is that it is basically
> an argument from silence.

But George Thompson writes:

> Maybe it would be better to call Steve's position an argument *for*
> silence, instead of an argument *from* silence*, since in fact the evidence
> seems to be, in a very real sense, silent: it does not, at all, tell us all
> of the amazing things that have been claimed for it.

What I thought was novel in the argument -- and I claimed this in the
original post -- was that it *wasn't* an argument from silence at all.
Reports of the first IVC seal were published in 1875, and since then
we've found thousands more of the same. That provides a pretty solid
empirical foundation for drawing conclusions. The evidence strongly
suggests an anomalous continuity in logographic forms that is unlike
anything found in any premodern civilization where normal scribal
pressures for simplification existed. This is *positive* evidence that
the script was not used to create an extensive 'lost literature.' If
the literature had existed the scribal pressure would be evident. That
is not an 'argument from silence.'

The same conclusion comes when we consider the unusually low frequency
of occurrences of the majority of IVC signs: Empirical evidence of
this was provided in my original post. This is *positive* evidence
that the majority of Harappan signs remained logographic throughout
its history -- indicating again that normal scribal pressures towards
syllabic forms, arising from widespread literary use of the script,
were absent. This is again *not* an 'argument from silence' as that
phrase is normally used. The consistently elevated number of logograms
in every period of Harappan history stands out like a sore thumb when
compared with the rapid and radical changes taking place in the same
period in Sumerian and Akkadian cuneiform scripts. See here Miguel
Civil, "The Sumerian writing system: some problems," Orientalia NS 42:
21-34, whose data are summarized in Parpola 1994: 35. Here we find the
normal and expected rapid descent in the number of logographic signs
expected in fully literate cultures. Indeed, within a few centuries
the number of cuneiform logograms dropped from a high of 60+ percent
in Sumerian (which was still apparently much lower than the number of
logograms found at *any* point in Harappan script) to a low in
Akkadian -- evolving in just a few centuries -- 3.5 percen! This rapid
evolution in the scripts occurred in exactly the same period that
Harappan script, illustrated in thousands of examples discovered since
the 19th century, showed minimal evolution. This is again a *positive*
suggestion of the lack of normal scribal pressures in Harappan script.
My argument was in no way an 'argument from silence.'

The evidence from comparative history is actually strong indeed. Let
me stick out my neck  -- contra just about everyone -- and predict
outright that NO evidence will EVER be found that there were extended
Harappan texts. If some show up, we would have to revise just about
*everything* we know about the history of writing, gained from long
study in Egypt, Greece (linear B, etc.), the Middle East, China,
Mesoamerica, and many other places. Lots of positive evidence from
comparative history argues against extended texts; not one iota of
positive evidence argues for it; the argument in no way depends on an
'argument from silence.'

More on India/Europe, in response to Valerie Roebuck, as more data
come in:

On translations into European languages in the 16th century of Hindu
texts, see indeed Donald Lach, _Asia in the Making of Europe_, Vol. I,
book 1 (1965: 280), and his sources. E.g., Lach writes:

"In 1548 a basketful of Brahmanical books was confiscated on the
island of Divar and brought to the College of Goa for a translation,
at which point they seem to disappear from the records. Ten years
later, however, events took a more auspicious turn. A convert, learned
in Brahmanical literature, stole a number of manuscripts from a former
friend of his (evidently a Brahman) and brought them to Goa, where he
set about rendering some of them into Portuguese. Through these
translations the Jesuits learned something about the ten Avatars of
Vishnu and the high literature written in Marathi. A considerable part
of the Bhagavadgita was translated into Portuguese from the free
rendition of Jnaaneshvar. The translation of the Yogaraaj Tilaka, a
charming Marathi dialogue between a pupil and his teacher, dealing
with eternal questions, let the Christians know something about the
beliefs currently being discussed by Indian writers. The Europeans
also became acquainted at this time with the Sannyaasis, Yogis,
Avadhuutas, and the four life-stages of the Brahmans. Manuscript
copies of these translations were sent to Europe, where they are still
preserved at Evora and Rome."

Lach's source for these claims is found apparently (I mistakenly
failed to copy his whole bibliography, so I only have a partial
reference) in the massive collection of ecclesiastic documents printed
in Josef Wicki, _Documenta Indica_, found in the 17 or so volumes of
_Monumenta historica Societatis Iesu (1948-1988)_. I didn't have time
to look at the sources, but good source material apparently exists.
Happy Latin readings!

My regards,
Steve Farmer