Harappan Deciphered?!

[Steve Farmer]

On the "recent decipherment [of Harappan] by N. Jha and
N.S. Rajaram," K. Elst writes -- possibly with a touch of irony?:

> Meanwhile I notice that some list members have swiftly dismissed the recent
> decipherment by N. Jha and N.S. Rajaram.  It would be quite a service to the
> perplexed public, esp. in India, if the non-viability of that decipherment
> were firmly demonstrated rather than cursorily asserted.  I assume most of
> you have more urgent matters on their hands, but to your students it might
> be a useful exercise.  I will gladly settle for Prof. Witzel's diagnosis
> that regarding the Indus script we are back at square one, but then it might
> be good for the next generation of scholars to get a hands-on experience of
> what was wrong with the 20th-century decipherments, all the better to make a
> radically new start.

Many spectacular claims have indeed appeared in India and online
about the book by Jha & Rajaram. Unfortunately, the book is nearly
impossible to get in the West. I ordered a copy of it --
prepaid! -- from India long ago and have never received it; repeated
emails to the Indian publisher checking to check its status have gone
unanswered. I have also corresponded with one of its authors, to whom
I've mentioned repeatedly how much I wanted to read it; I've also been
promised a copy by one of his former collaborators in the US -- and
despite all these efforts still haven't been able to get my hands on
it. The book is not found in any university library in California --
where I do most of my research -- nor has a copy been deposited yet
even with the Library of Congress. Meanwhile, an extensive publicity
campaign in India has announced that the Harappan code has been broken
(see below) "thereby solving what is widely regarded as the most
significant technical problem in historical research in our time."

I'm absolutely sure that if researchers could get their hands on the
that it would get the evaluation that the book deserves. You can
hardly
equate an eagerness to dismiss things unread with inaccessibility.

Way back on 13 March 2000, Dr. Elst, you wrote to this List, with
obvious excitement:

> Friends,
>
>  Just returned from India, carrying among other things the freshly published
>  Deciphered Harappan Script by N. Jha & N.S. Rajaram.

You seem also to suggest in today's post that Jha & Rajaram may indeed
have already cracked the code. If so, you could contribute *immensely*
to this discussion if you could summarize the key arguments in
Jha & Rajaram for everyone. I have no doubts that every scholar in
the world would welcome any definitive decipherment no matter what
initial skepticism they might have. Any real decipherment would
constitute one of the grandest historical breakthroughs of modern
times -- as rightly stated in the press release accompanying the book.

When a code is broken (think of Linear B or the recent decipherment
of Maya!) the results can be readily verified -- and even the skeptics
can quickly be won over: You've either broken the code or you
haven't -- "Yes" or "No." You have access to Jha & Rajaram,
unlike other Western scholars. Has the code in fact been broken?
If so, could you kindly explain the results for the rest of us?

All I know about Jha & Rajaram comes from their press releases
and some correspondence that I've had with one of the authors,
who *does* claim -- unequivocally -- that they've cracked the code.
I've posted on the Web one of their press releases and the book's
table of contents so that everyone can get a fair idea of the
magnitude of what they are claiming. I've highlighted in red
some key items in the press release. To see it, go to:

http://www.safarmer.com/pico/crackedcode/html

Let me here summarize what is in that press release without
editorializing: In it (at the bottom), Dr. Jha is described as
"one of the world's foremost Vedic scholars and palaeographers
who has deciphered the 5000 year-old Indus (Harappan) script,
thereby solving what is widely regarded as the most significant
technical problem in historical research in our time."

Fully justified if the code is indeed cracked.

We find in the Jha/Rajaram release that Harappan is "Vedic Sanskrit,"
but in a form "less archaic than that of the Rigveda," corresponding
"closely to that of later Vedic works like the Suutras and the
Upanishads." The obvious suggestion is that the RV goes back
before Harappan civilization and that the Upanishads and Suutras
are cotemporaneous with it.  Thus we find that the
"Harappans belong to the later Vedic Age," that the
Upanishads and Suutras are of hoary age -- and the RV is *by
far* mankind's earliest text.

I for one am willing -- eager! -- to listen to any and all
arguments that you are willing to report on these views,
Dr. Elst. I'm very sure that others too would also join in
on the discussion.

> It would be quite a service to the
> perplexed public, esp. in India, if the non-viability of that decipherment
> were firmly demonstrated rather than cursorily asserted.  I assume most of
> you have more urgent matters on their hands, but to your students it might
> be a useful exercise.  I will gladly settle for Prof. Witzel's diagnosis
> that regarding the Indus script we are back at square one, but then it might
> be good for the next generation of scholars to get a hands-on experience of
> what was wrong with the 20th-century decipherments, all the better to make a
> radically new start.

You alone have the book in hand and can get the discussion that you
say you
want going. Are you willing to start?

My best,
Steve Farmer