Science Mag: "no Indus script"

[Jonathan Silk]

I wonder if the zi.s.tas would care to comment on what has always
seemed to me a classic case of circular reasoning: the IVC looks
like, and should be understood at least in part as, a precursor to
later Indian developments (e.g., in the cases of Ziva, ritual
bathing, status of certain animals), but primarily so seen in light
of those later developments--thus one proves the other. Is there a
way to de-link the IVC objects/evidence from their retrospective
reconstructions, and still establish some continuity with later
Indian facts?
--
Jonathan Silk
Department of Asian Languages & Cultures
Center for Buddhist Studies
UCLA
290 Royce Hall
Box 951540
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1540
phone: (310)206-8235
fax:  (310)825-8808
silk at humnet.ucla.edu