Customer Reviews

Deciphering the Indus Script

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Every chapter was fascinating reading. While the book contains a wealth of information, it is presented so that even an amateur can appreciate it. The author is balanced in his treatment of work done on the script even though he might disagree with the work of other scholars. He certainly does not claim to have deciphered the script but presents his arguments clearly for the reader to decide whether they have merit. He also presents ideas about fruitdul avenues to pursue. The only possible negative comment is that there is too much to absorb in this book.

Excellent summary of four decades of pioneering research by Prof. Parpola showing Dravidian as the dominant culture and language of Indus valley civilization prior to the arrival of Aryans in Punjab.

Goes against the day dreams of the elitist thinking of Hindu(tva) fundamentalists.

This is an excellent reference on the Indus script by a meticulous researcher whose breadth of knowledge spans the vast expanse of Indian proto-history. The book covers not just the Indus script but also ancient Indian religion and practises, theories of migrations, comparisons with Mesopotamia and other cultures, etc. The readings of some of the signs and seals is tantalizing, although these cannot be as yet confirmed due to the lack of bilinguals or other evidence.

Do not be fooled by the low ratings given by some reviewers who obviously have an axe to grind (they were probably disappointed that the book's conclusions do not support their Hindutva-motivated views). Go ahead and buy this book -- it is a must-have for anyone interested in the Indus civilization.

I recently purchased this book and read this book extensively . I had a background in Sanskrit language and experience in reading Sanskrit literature for quite few years.
There are some good points and some bad points in this book.
The following are the good points.
a) He methodically and systematically explains the context of some of the glyphs.
b) His comparison of the some of the Indus seals with sumerian seals is reasonable and helps the reader to understand the thinking that prevailed in 3000 B.C.
c) His knowledge of South Indian languages is good.

Here are the negative points in his book.
a) He keeps proposing this theory that the so called Aryans came into Indus valley in 1400 B.C. This is not proven by any literary evidence or through archeological evidence. He proposes that Rig Veda was composed in 1200 B.C which is quite controverial.
b) His proto-dravidian construct words are not attested any where. This proto-dravidian hypothetical language never existed in the history of south India.

Asko Parpola has been hawking his theory of the Indus script for close to three decades. As new evidence comes in counter to his claims, he shifts his theory accordingly but without abandoning the framework as should have been done long ago. Paropla's analysis of the Indus script as well as the Vedic texts is very flawed. He is surprisingly not aware of key information. For example, he sees the Gilgamesh motif of the Harappan art as having been borrowed from the Mesopotaminas, but the same motif occurs in the much earlier rock art of Central India. According to the archaeologists, there is a continuity in the Indian culture during 8000-1000 BC; Parpola ignores this to assert his immigration hypothesis.

Summarizing four decades of research to decode the Indus valley culture as Dravidian.

The Indus valley flourished before the arrival of Aryans in Punjab

The book is more about Parpola's pet thesis that the Indian civilization is derivative to the Mesopotamian than about any real advance in the decipherment of the script. Parpola's thesis on the archaeological situation flies against the opinion of all the archaeologists and it is worthless.

Parpola's theories have set back the cause of the study of the Harappan script by 2 decades. All the archaeological evidence that has come in since he proposed his ill-conceived model has weighed in against it.