Editing Indus Valley Civilisation (section)

== Mature Harappan ==
[[file:Indus Valley Civilization, Mature Phase (2600-1900 BCE).png|thumb|upright=1.5|Mature Harappan Period, {{Circa|2600}}–1900&nbsp;BCE]]

{{multiple image|perrow=1/2/1|total_width=230|caption_align=center
| align =
| title = Mature Harappan
| image2 = Another view of Granary and Great Hall on Mound F.JPG|caption2=View of Granary and Great Hall on Mound F in [[Harappa]]
| image3 = The drainage system at Lothal 2.JPG|caption3=Archaeological remains of washroom drainage system at [[Lothal]]
| image4 = DHOLAVIRA SITE (24).jpg|caption4=[[Dholavira]] in [[Gujarat, India]], is one of the largest cities of Indus Valley civilisation, with [[stepwell]] steps to reach the water level in artificially constructed reservoirs.<ref name=news>{{Cite journal |author=Shuichi Takezawa |journal=Journal of Architecture and Building Science |volume=117 |issue=1492 |date=August 2002 |page=24 |url=http://news-sv.aij.or.jp/jabs/s1/jabs0208-019.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20031206150624/http://news-sv.aij.or.jp/jabs/s1/jabs0208-019.pdf |archive-date=6 December 2003 |url-status=live |title=Stepwells – Cosmology of Subterranean Architecture as seen in Adalaj |access-date=18 November 2009 }}</ref>
}}

According to Giosan et al. (2012), the slow southward migration of the monsoons across Asia initially allowed the Indus Valley villages to develop by taming the floods of the Indus and its tributaries. Flood-supported farming led to large agricultural surpluses, which in turn supported the development of cities. The IVC residents did not develop irrigation capabilities, relying mainly on the seasonal monsoons leading to summer floods.{{Sfn|Giosan|Clift|Macklin|Fuller|2012}} Brooke further notes that the development of advanced cities coincides with a reduction in rainfall, which may have triggered a reorganisation into larger urban centres.<ref name=brooke-2014/>{{refn|group=lower-alpha|name="Note-Brooke"}}

According to J.G. Shaffer and D.A. Lichtenstein,<ref>{{cite book |title=Old Problems and New Perspectives in the Archaeology of South Asia |last1=Shaffer |first1=Jim G. |author1-link=Jim G. Shaffer |last2=Lichtenstein |first2=Diane A. |year=1989 |series=Wisconsin Archaeological Reports |volume=2 |pages=117–126 |chapter=Ethnicity and Change in the Indus Valley Cultural Tradition}}</ref> the Mature Harappan civilisation was "a fusion of the Bagor, Hakra, and Kot Diji traditions or 'ethnic groups' in the Ghaggar-Hakra valley on the borders of India and Pakistan".<ref name="possehl" />

Also, according to a more recent summary by Maisels (2003), "The Harappan oecumene formed from a Kot Dijian/[[Amri culture|Amri-Nal]] synthesis". He also says that, in the development of complexity, the site of Mohenjo-daro has priority, along with the Hakra-Ghaggar cluster of sites, "where Hakra wares actually precede the Kot Diji related material". He sees these areas as "catalytic in producing the fusion from Hakra, Kot Dijian and Amri-Nal cultural elements that resulted in the gestalt we recognize as Early Harappan (Early Indus)."<ref>{{Cite book|last=Maisels|first=Charles Keith|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=I2dgI2ijww8C&pg=PA216|title=Early Civilizations of the Old World: The Formative Histories of Egypt, The Levant, Mesopotamia, India and China|date=2003|page=216|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-134-83730-4|language=en|access-date=14 February 2023|archive-date=1 November 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221101143328/https://books.google.ca/books?id=I2dgI2ijww8C&pg=PA216|url-status=live}}</ref>

By {{nowrap|2600 BCE,}} the Early Harappan communities turned into large urban centres. Such urban centres include [[Harappa]], [[Ganeriwala]], [[Mohenjo-daro]] in modern-day Pakistan, and [[Dholavira]], [[Kalibangan]], [[Rakhigarhi]], [[Rupar]], and [[Lothal]] in modern-day India.<ref name="re-enters">{{cite magazine |url=http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indus-river-re-enters-india/1/158976.html |title=Indus re-enters India after two centuries, feeds Little Rann, Nal Sarovar |magazine=India Today |date=7 November 2011 |access-date=7 November 2011 |archive-date=9 January 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180109090722/http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indus-river-re-enters-india/1/158976.html |url-status=live }}</ref> In total, more than 1,000&nbsp;settlements have been found, mainly in the general region of the Indus and Ghaggar-Hakra Rivers and their tributaries.{{refn|group=lower-alpha|name=reported_sites}}

=== Cities ===
{{Main|Harappan architecture}}
A sophisticated and technologically advanced urban culture is evident in the Indus Valley Civilisation, making them the first urban centre in the region. The quality of municipal town planning suggests the knowledge of [[urban planning]] and efficient municipal governments which placed a high priority on [[hygiene]], or, alternatively, accessibility to the means of religious ritual.{{sfn|Possehl|2002|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XVgeAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA193 193ff]}}

As seen in Harappa, Mohenjo-daro and the recently{{When|date=July 2024}} partially excavated [[Rakhigarhi]], this urban plan included the world's first known [[Sanitation of the Indus Valley civilisation|urban sanitation system]]s. Within the city, individual homes or groups of homes obtained water from [[water well|wells]]. From a room that appears to have been set aside for bathing, [[wastewater|waste water]] was directed to covered drains, which lined the major streets. Houses opened only to inner [[courtyard]]s and smaller lanes. The housebuilding in some villages in the region still resembles in some respects the housebuilding of the Harappans.{{refn|group=lower-alpha|It has been noted that the courtyard pattern and techniques of flooring of Harappan houses has similarities to the way house-building is still done in some villages of the region.{{Sfn|Lal|2002|pp=93–95}}}}

The ancient Indus systems of sewerage and drainage that were developed and used in cities throughout the Indus region were far more advanced than any found in contemporary urban sites in the Middle East and even more efficient than those in many areas of Pakistan and India today.{{Unbalanced opinion|date=July 2024}} The advanced architecture of the Harappans is shown by their dockyards, [[granary|granaries]], warehouses, brick platforms, and protective walls. The massive walls of Indus cities most likely protected the Harappans from floods and may have dissuaded military conflicts.{{sfn|Morris|1994|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=whBEAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA31 31]}}

The purpose of the citadel remains debated. In sharp contrast to this civilisation's contemporaries, [[Mesopotamia]] and [[ancient Egypt]], no large monumental structures were built. There is no conclusive evidence of palaces or temples.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia|last=Kenoyer|first=Jonathan Mark|date=2008 |url=https://southasiaoutreach.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/757/2017/08/Kenoyer2008-Indus-Valley-Article.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200412163416/https://southasiaoutreach.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/757/2017/08/Kenoyer2008-Indus-Valley-Article.pdf |archive-date=12 April 2020 |url-status=live |title=Indus Civilization |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of Archaeology|volume=1|page=719}}</ref> Some structures are thought to have been granaries. Found at one city is an enormous well-built bath (the "[[Great Bath, Mohenjo-daro|Great Bath]]"), which may have been a public bath. Although the citadels were walled, it is far from clear that these structures were defensive.

Most city dwellers appear to have been traders or artisans, who lived with others pursuing the same occupation in well-defined neighbourhoods. Materials from distant regions were used in the cities for constructing seals, beads and other objects. Among the [[artifact (archaeology)|artefacts]] discovered were beautiful glazed [[faïence]] beads. [[Steatite]] seals have images of animals, people (perhaps gods), and other types of inscriptions, including the yet un-deciphered [[Indus script|writing system of the Indus Valley Civilisation]]. Some of the seals were used to stamp clay on trade goods.

Although some houses were larger than others, Indus civilisation cities were remarkable for their apparent, if relative, [[egalitarianism]]. All the houses had access to water and drainage facilities. This gives the impression of a society with relatively low [[wealth concentration]].<ref name="green">{{Cite journal|last=Green|first=Adam S.|date=16 September 2020|title=Killing the Priest-King: Addressing Egalitarianism in the Indus Civilization|journal=Journal of Archaeological Research |volume=29|issue=2|pages=153–202|doi=10.1007/s10814-020-09147-9|issn=1573-7756|doi-access=free}}</ref>

=== Authority and governance ===
Archaeological records provide no immediate answers for a centre of power or for depictions of people in power in Harappan society. But, there are indications of complex decisions being taken and implemented. For instance, the majority of the cities were constructed in a highly uniform and well-planned grid pattern, suggesting they were planned by a central authority; extraordinary uniformity of Harappan artefacts as evident in pottery, seals, weights and bricks;<ref>{{cite book |last1=Angelakis |first1=Andreas N. |last2=Rose |first2=Joan B. |title=Evolution of Sanitation and Wastewater Technologies through the Centuries |date=14 September 2014 |publisher=IWA Publishing |isbn=978-1-78040-484-4 |pages=26, 40 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=mbgrBQAAQBAJ&q=indus+valley+civilization+cities+highly+uniform+grid+pattern+suggesting+made+by+central+authority |access-date=27 February 2022 |language=en}}</ref> presence of public facilities and monumental architecture;{{sfn|Kenoyer|1997}} heterogeneity in the mortuary symbolism and in grave goods (items included in burials).<ref>{{Cite web |title= |url=https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/G_Robbins_Schug_Ritual_2020.pdf |access-date=2 February 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230920150807/https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/G_Robbins_Schug_Ritual_2020.pdf |archive-date=20 September 2023 }}</ref>

These are some major theories:{{citation needed|date=May 2016}}
* There was a single state, given the similarity in artefacts, the evidence for planned settlements, the standardised ratio of brick size, and the establishment of settlements near sources of raw material.
* There was no single ruler but several cities like Mohenjo-daro had a separate ruler, Harappa another, and so forth.

=== Metallurgy ===
Harappans evolved some new techniques in [[metallurgy]] and produced copper, [[bronze]], lead, and [[tin]].{{citation needed|date=June 2019}}

A [[Touchstone (assaying tool)|touchstone]] bearing gold streaks was found in [[Banawali]], which was probably used for testing the purity of gold (such a technique is still used in some parts of India).<ref name="possehl">{{cite book |title=Harappan Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective |last=Bisht |first=R.S. |publisher=Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. |year=1982 |location=New Delhi |pages=113–124 |chapter=Excavations at Banawali: 1974–77 |editor=Possehl Gregory L.}}</ref>

=== Metrology ===
[[File:Harappan (Indus Valley) Balance & Weights.jpg|thumb|upright=0.9|Harappan weights found in the Indus Valley, ([[National Museum, New Delhi]])<ref>{{cite book |title=Art of the First Cities: The Third Millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus |date=2003 |publisher=Metropolitan Museum of Art |isbn=9781588390431 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/artoffirstcities0000unse/page/401 401]–402 |url=https://archive.org/details/artoffirstcities0000unse |url-access=registration}}</ref>]]

{{further|Indian mathematics#Prehistory}}
The people of the Indus civilisation achieved great accuracy in measuring length, mass, and time. They were among the first to develop a system of uniform weights and measures.{{dubious|date=June 2019}} A comparison of available objects indicates large scale variation across the Indus territories. Their smallest division, which is marked on an ivory scale found in [[Lothal]] in Gujarat, was approximately 1.704&nbsp;mm, the smallest division ever recorded on a scale of the [[Bronze Age]].{{citation needed|date=June 2019}} Harappan engineers followed the decimal division of measurement for all practical purposes, including the measurement of mass as revealed by their [[hexahedron]] weights.{{citation needed|date=June 2019}}

These [[chert]] weights were in a ratio of 5:2:1 with weights of 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, and 500&nbsp;units, with each unit weighing approximately 28&nbsp;grams, similar to the English [[Imperial units#Mass and weight|Imperial ounce]] or Greek uncia, and smaller objects were weighed in similar ratios with the units of 0.871&nbsp;. However, as in other cultures, actual weights were not uniform throughout the area. The weights and measures later used in [[Kautilya]]'s ''[[Arthashastra]]'' (4th&nbsp;century BCE) are the same as those used in [[Lothal]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Sergent |first=Bernard |title=Genèse de l'Inde |year=1997 |page=113 |language=fr |isbn=978-2-228-89116-5 |publisher=Payot |location=Paris}}</ref>

=== Arts and crafts ===
{{see also|Pottery in the Indian subcontinent}}
Many [[Indus script|Indus Valley seal]]s and items in [[Indian Pottery|pottery]] and [[terracotta]] have been found, along with a very few stone sculptures and some gold jewellery and bronze vessels. Some anatomically detailed figurines in [[terracotta]], bronze, and steatite have been found at excavation sites, the former probably mostly toys.{{Sfn|McIntosh|2008|p=248}} The Harappans also made various toys and games, among them cubical [[dice]] (with one to six holes on the faces), which were found in sites like Mohenjo-daro.{{Sfn|Lal|2002|p=89}}

The terracotta figurines included cows, bears, monkeys, and dogs. The animal depicted on a majority of seals at sites of the mature period has not been clearly identified. Part bull, part zebra, with a majestic horn, it has been a source of speculation. As yet, there is insufficient evidence to substantiate claims that the image had religious or cultic significance, but the prevalence of the image raises the question of whether or not the animals in images of the IVC are religious symbols.<ref name="Keay, John 2000">Keay, John, India, a History. New York: Grove Press, 2000.</ref>

Many crafts including, "shell working, ceramics, and agate and glazed steatite bead making" were practised and the pieces were used in the making of necklaces, bangles, and other ornaments from all phases of Harappan culture. Some of these crafts are still practised in the subcontinent today.{{sfn|Kenoyer|1997}} Some make-up and toiletry items (a special kind of combs (kakai), the use of [[collyrium]] and a special three-in-one toiletry gadget) that were found in Harappan contexts still have similar counterparts in modern India.{{sfn|Lal|2002|p=82}} Terracotta female figurines were found ({{Circa|2800}}–2600&nbsp;BCE) which had red colour applied to the "manga" (line of partition of the hair).{{sfn|Lal|2002|p=82}}

Archeological remains from 2000 to 3000 BC have been found from the city of [[Lothal]] of pieces on a board that resemble chess.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Greenberg |first1=Henry J. |title=The Anti-War Wargame: a Comprehensive Analysis of the Origins of the Game of Chess 1989-1990 |date=30 September 2015 |publisher=iUniverse |isbn=9781491773536 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yjStCgAAQBAJ&dq=chaturanga+pieces+from+lothal&pg=PT9 |access-date=21 June 2021 |ref=culin}}</ref>

The finds from Mohenjo-daro were initially deposited in the [[Lahore Museum]], but later moved to the ASI headquarters at New Delhi, where a new "Central Imperial Museum" was being planned for the new capital of the British Raj, in which at least a selection would be displayed. It became apparent that Indian independence was approaching, but the [[Partition of India]] was not anticipated until late in the process. The new Pakistani authorities requested the return of the Mohenjo-daro pieces excavated on their territory, but the Indian authorities refused. Eventually an agreement was reached, whereby the finds, totalling some 12,000 objects (most [[sherd]]s of pottery), were split equally between the countries; in some cases this was taken very literally, with some necklaces and girdles having their beads separated into two piles. In the case of the "two most celebrated sculpted figures", Pakistan asked for and received the [[Mohenjo-daro Priest-King|so-called ''Priest-King'' figure]], while India retained the much smaller [[Dancing Girl (prehistoric sculpture)|''Dancing Girl'']].<ref>Singh (2015), 111-112 (112 quoted)</ref>

Though written considerably later, the arts treatise ''[[Natya Shastra]]'' ({{circa|200 BCE – 200 CE}}) classifies musical instruments into four groups based on their means of acoustical production—strings, membranes, solid materials and air—and it is probable that such instruments had existed since the IVC.{{sfn|Flora|2000|p=319}} Archeological evidence indicates the use of simple [[Rattle (percussion instrument)|rattle]]s and [[vessel flute]]s, while iconographical evidence suggests early harps and drums were also used.{{sfn|Flora|2000|pp=319–320}} An [[ideogram]] in the IVC contains the earliest known depiction of an [[arched harp]], dated sometime before 1800 BCE.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |last1=DeVale |first1=Sue Carole |last2=Lawergren |first2=Bo |author-link2=Bo Lawergren |year=2001 |encyclopedia=[[Grove Music Online]] |title=Harp: IV. Asia |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |location=Oxford |doi=10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.45738 |isbn=978-1-56159-263-0 |url-access=subscription |url=https://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000045738 |access-date=20 October 2021 |archive-date=20 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211020214901/https://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.001.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000045738 |url-status=live }} {{Grove Music subscription}}</ref>

<gallery widths="170" heights="170">

File:Ceremonial Vessel LACMA AC1997.93.1.jpg|Ceremonial vessel; 2600–2450&nbsp;BC; terracotta with black paint; 49.53 × 25.4&nbsp;cm; [[Los Angeles County Museum of Art]] (US)

Poids cubiques harappéens - BM.jpg|Cubical weights, standardised throughout the Indus cultural zone; 2600–1900 BC; chert; [[British Museum]] (London)

Harappan carnelian and terracotta beads - Mohenjo-daro.jpg|[[Mohenjo-daro]] beads; 2600–1900 BC; [[carnelian]] and [[terracotta]]; British Museum

Oiseau a tete de belier monte sur roues Indus Guimet.jpg|Ram-headed bird mounted on wheels, probably a toy; 2600–1900 BC; terracotta; [[Guimet Museum]] (Paris)
</gallery>

====Human statuettes====
{{Further information|Dancing Girl (prehistoric sculpture)}}
A handful of realistic statuettes have been found at IVC sites, of which much the most famous{{Opinion|date=July 2024}} is the [[lost-wax casting]] [[bronze sculpture|bronze]] statuette of a slender-limbed ''[[Dancing Girl (prehistoric sculpture)|Dancing Girl]]'' adorned with bangles, found in Mohenjo-daro. Two other realistic incomplete statuettes have been found in Harappa in proper stratified excavations, which display near-[[Classical antiquity|Classical]] treatment of the human shape: the [[:File:Harappa 13 grey stone male dancer statuette.jpg|statuette of a dancer]] who seems to be male, and the ''Harappa Torso'', a [[:File:Harappa red jasper male torso.jpg|red jasper male torso]], both now in the Delhi National Museum. [[John Marshall (archaeologist)|Sir John Marshall]] reacted with surprise when he saw these two statuettes from Harappa:{{sfn|Marshall|1931|p=[https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.722/page/n82 45]}}

{{blockquote|When I first saw them I found it difficult to believe that they were prehistoric; they seemed to completely upset all established ideas about early art, and culture. Modelling such as this was unknown in the ancient world up to the Hellenistic age of Greece, and I thought, therefore, that some mistake must surely have been made; that these figures had found their way into levels some 3000&nbsp;years older than those to which they properly belonged ... Now, in these statuettes, it is just this anatomical truth which is so startling; that makes us wonder whether, in this all-important matter, Greek artistry could possibly have been anticipated by the sculptors of a far-off age on the banks of the Indus.{{sfn|Marshall|1931|p=[https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.722/page/n82 45]}}}}

These statuettes remain controversial, due to their advanced style in representing the human body. Regarding the red jasper torso, the discoverer, [[Madho Sarup Vats|Vats]], claims a Harappan date, but Marshall considered this statuette is probably historical, dating to the [[Gupta Empire|Gupta]] period, comparing it to the much later [[Lohanipur torso]].{{sfn|Possehl|2002|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=pmAuAsi4ePIC&pg=PA111 111]–[https://books.google.com/books?id=pmAuAsi4ePIC&pg=PA112 112]}}  A second rather similar grey stone torso of a dancing male was also found about 150&nbsp;meters away in a secure Mature Harappan stratum. Overall, anthropologist [[Gregory Possehl]] tends to consider that these statuettes probably form the pinnacle of Indus art during the Mature Harappan period.{{sfn|Possehl|2002|p=111}}

<gallery widths="170" heights="170">

Reclining mouflon MET DT252770.jpg|Reclining mouflon; 2600–1900&nbsp;BC; marble; length: 28&nbsp;cm; [[Metropolitan Museum of Art]] (New York City)

File:Mohenjo-daro Priesterkönig.jpeg|The [[Priest-king (sculpture)|''Priest-King'']]; 2400–1900&nbsp;BC; low fired steatite; height: 17.5&nbsp;cm; [[National Museum of Pakistan]] ([[Karachi]])

File:Harappa 13 grey stone male dancer statuette.jpg|Male dancing torso; 2400–1900&nbsp;BC; limestone; height: 9.9&nbsp;cm; [[National Museum, New Delhi|National Museum]] ([[New Delhi]])

Dancing girl of Mohenjo-daro.jpg|The ''[[Dancing Girl (prehistoric sculpture)|Dancing Girl]]''; 2400–1900&nbsp;BC; bronze; height: 10.8&nbsp;cm; National Museum (New Delhi)

</gallery>

==== Seals ====
{{Main|Indus script}}
[[File:IndusValleySeals.JPG|200px|thumb|right|Stamp seals and (right) impressions, some of them with [[Indus script]]; probably made of steatite; [[British Museum]] (London)]]
Thousands of [[steatite]] seals have been recovered, and their physical character is fairly consistent. In size they range from squares of side {{convert|3/4|to|1+1/2|in|cm|order=flip|abbr=on|0}}. In most cases they have a pierced boss at the back to accommodate a cord for handling or for use as personal adornment.  In addition a large number of sealings have survived, of which only a few can be matched to the seals.  The great majority of examples of the [[Indus script]] are short groups of signs on seals.{{Sfn|Possehl|2002|p=127}}

Seals have been found at [[Mohenjo-daro]] depicting a figure standing on its head, and another, on the [[Pashupati seal]], sitting cross-legged in what some{{who|date=February 2020}} call a [[yoga]]-like pose (see image, the so-called ''Pashupati'', below). This figure has been variously identified. Sir John Marshall identified a resemblance to the Hindu god, Shiva.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Mackay |first=Ernest John Henry |title=Excavations at Mohenjodaro |journal=Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of India |year=1928–1929 |pages=74–75 }}</ref>

A [[:File:Indus bull-man fighting beast.jpg|human deity with the horns, hooves and tail of a bull]] also appears in the seals, in particular in a fighting scene with a horned tiger-like beast. This deity has been compared to the Mesopotamian bull-man [[Enkidu]].<ref name="Littleton">{{cite book |last1=Littleton |first1=C. Scott |title=Gods, Goddesses, and Mythology |date=2005 |publisher=Marshall Cavendish |isbn=9780761475651 |page=732 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=u27FpnXoyJQC&pg=PA732 |access-date=24 April 2019 |archive-date=23 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231223182624/https://books.google.com/books?id=u27FpnXoyJQC&pg=PA732#v=onepage&q&f=false |url-status=live }}</ref>{{sfn|Marshall|1996|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=Ds_hazstxY4C&pg=PA389 389]}}<ref name="Pearson">{{cite book |last1=Singh |first1=Vipul |year=2008 |title=The Pearson Indian History Manual for the UPSC Civil Services Preliminary Examination |publisher=Pearson Education India |isbn=9788131717530 |page=35 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wsiXwh_tIGkC&pg=PA35 |access-date=24 April 2019 |archive-date=23 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231223182624/https://books.google.com/books?id=wsiXwh_tIGkC&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false |url-status=live }}</ref> Several seals also show a man fighting two lions or tigers, a "[[Master of Animals]]" motif common to civilisations in Western and South Asia.<ref name="Pearson" /><ref>{{cite book |title=The Indus Script. Text, Concordance And Tables Iravathan Mahadevan |page=[https://archive.org/details/TheIndusScript.TextConcordanceAndTablesIravathanMahadevan/page/n111 76] |url=https://archive.org/details/TheIndusScript.TextConcordanceAndTablesIravathanMahadevan}}</ref>

<gallery widths="170" heights="170">

MET 1984 482 237872.jpg|Seal; 3000–1500 BC; baked [[steatite]]; 2 × 2&nbsp;cm; [[Metropolitan Museum of Art]] (New York City)

File:Stamp seal and modern impression- unicorn and incense burner (?) MET DP23101 (cropped).jpg|Stamp seal and modern impression: unicorn and incense burner (?); 2600–1900&nbsp;BC; burnt steatite; 3.8 × 3.8 × 1&nbsp;cm; Metropolitan Museum of Art

Clevelandart 1973.160.jpg|Seal with two-horned bull and inscription; 2010 BC; steatite; overall: 3.2 x 3.2&nbsp;cm; [[Cleveland Museum of Art]] ([[Cleveland, Ohio]], US)

File:Clevelandart 1973.161.jpg|Seal with unicorn and inscription; 2010 BC; steatite; overall: 3.5 x 3.6&nbsp;cm; Cleveland Museum of Art

File:Constitution Page1 Rammanohar.jpg|Seal painted on the first page of Constitution of India
</gallery>

=== Trade and transportation ===
{{further|Lothal|Meluhha|Shortugai}}

[[File:Bronze Age IVC Trade Route.png|thumb|Archaeological discoveries suggest that trade routes between [[Mesopotamia]] and the Indus were active during the 3rd&nbsp;millennium BCE, leading to the development of [[Indus–Mesopotamia relations]].<ref name="JR12">{{cite book |last2=Reade |first2=Julian E. |title=The Indus-Mesopotamia relationship reconsidered |first1=GS Elisabeth |last1=During-Caspers |date=2008 |publisher=Archaeopress |isbn=978-1-4073-0312-3 |pages=12–14 |url=https://www.academia.edu/28245304 |access-date=5 April 2019 |archive-date=14 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220114145706/https://www.academia.edu/28245304 |url-status=live }}</ref>]]

[[File:Disha Kaka Boat with Direction Finding Birds, model of Mohenjo-Daro seal, 3000 BCE.jpg|thumb|Boat with direction-finding birds to find land.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Kenoyer |first1=Jonathan M. |last2=Heuston |first2=Kimberley Burton |title=The Ancient South Asian World |date=2005 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-522243-2 |page=66 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7CjvF88iEE8C&pg=PA66 |language=en |quote="The molded terra-cotta tablet shows a flat-bottomed Indus boat with a central cabin.  Branches tied to the roof may have been used for protection from bad luck, and travelers took a pet bird along to help them guide them to land." |access-date=24 June 2022 |archive-date=23 June 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220623163920/https://books.google.com/books?id=7CjvF88iEE8C&pg=PA66 |url-status=live }}</ref>{{sfn|Mathew|2017|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=u0IwDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT32 32]}} Model of [[Mohenjo-daro]] tablet, 2500–1750 BCE.([[National Museum, New Delhi]]).{{sfn|McIntosh|2008|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=1AJO2A-CbccC&pg=PA158 158]–[https://books.google.com/books?id=1AJO2A-CbccC&pg=PA159 159]}}{{sfn|Allchin|Allchin|1982|loc=pp. 188–189, listing of figures [https://books.google.com/books?id=r4s-YsP6vcIC&pg=PR10 p.x]}} Flat-bottomed river row-boats appear in two Indus seals, but their seaworthiness is debatable.<ref name=robinson>{{citation|last=Robinson|first=Andrew|title=The Indus: Lost Civilizations|location=London|publisher=Reakton Books|pages=89&ndash;91|isbn=9781780235417|year=2015|quote=To what extent such a reed-made river vessel would have been seaworthy is debatable. ... Did the flat-bottomed Indus river boats mutate into the crescent-shaped hull of Heyerdahl's reed boat before taking to the Arabian Sea? Did they reach as far as the coast of East Africa, as the Tigris did? No one knows.}}</ref>]]

The Indus Valley civilisation may have had [[bullock cart]]s identical to those seen throughout South Asia today, as well as boats. Most of these boats were probably small, flat-bottomed craft, perhaps driven by sail, similar to those one can see on the Indus River today;.  An extensive canal network, used for irrigation, has however also been discovered by H.-P. Francfort.{{sfn|Singh, Upinder|2008|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=H3lUIIYxWkEC&pg=PA157 157]}}

During 4300–3200&nbsp;BCE of the [[chalcolithic]] period (copper age), the Indus Valley Civilisation area shows ceramic similarities with southern [[Turkmenistan]] and northern Iran which suggest considerable mobility and trade. During the Early Harappan period (about 3200–2600&nbsp;BCE), similarities in pottery, seals, figurines, ornaments, etc. document intensive caravan trade with [[Central Asia]] and the [[Iranian plateau]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Parpola|2005|pp=2–3}}</ref>

Judging from the dispersal of Indus civilisation artefacts, the trade networks economically integrated a huge area, including portions of [[Afghanistan]], the coastal regions of [[Persian Gulf|Persia]] connected by the [[Gulf of Oman]] from the [[Arabian Sea]], northern and [[western India]], and [[Mesopotamia]], leading to the development of [[Indus-Mesopotamia relations]]. Studies of tooth enamel from individuals buried at Harappa suggest that some residents had migrated to the city from beyond the Indus Valley.<ref>{{cite web |title=Surprising Discoveries From the Indus Civilization |work=National Geographic |first=Traci |last=Watson |date=29 April 2013 |url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130425-indus-civilization-discoveries-harappa-archaeology-science/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130502003818/http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130425-indus-civilization-discoveries-harappa-archaeology-science/|url-status=dead|archive-date=2 May 2013}}</ref>  Ancient DNA studies of graves at Bronze Age sites at [[Gonur Depe]], Turkmenistan, and [[Shahr-e Sukhteh]], Iran, have identified 11 individuals of South Asian descent, who are presumed to be of mature Indus Valley origin.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Narasimhan|first1=Vagheesh M.|last2=Patterson|first2=Nick|last3=Moorjani|first3=Priya|last4=Rohland|first4=Nadin|last5=Bernardos|first5=Rebecca|last6=Mallick|first6=Swapan|last7=Lazaridis|first7=Iosif|last8=Nakatsuka|first8=Nathan|last9=Olalde|first9=Iñigo|last10=Lipson|first10=Mark|last11=Kim|first11=Alexander M.|date=6 September 2019|title=The Formation of Human Populations in South and Central Asia|journal=Science|volume=365|issue=6457|pages=eaat7487|doi=10.1126/science.aat7487|issn=0036-8075|pmc=6822619|pmid=31488661}}</ref>

There was an extensive maritime trade network operating between the Harappan and Mesopotamian civilisations as early as the middle Harappan Phase, with much commerce being handled by "middlemen merchants from [[Dilmun]]" (modern [[Bahrain]], [[Eastern Arabia]] and [[Failaka]] located in the [[Persian Gulf]]).<ref>{{cite book |title=Underwater archaeology proceedings of the Society for Historical Archaeology Conference at Kingston, Jamaica 1992 |last=Neyland |first=R.S. |publisher=Society for Historical Archaeology |year=1992 |location=Tucson, AZ |pages=68–74 |chapter=The seagoing vessels on Dilmun seals |editor1=Keith, D.H. |editor2=Carrell T.L.}}</ref> Such long-distance sea trade became feasible with the development of plank-built watercraft, equipped with a single central mast supporting a sail of woven rushes or cloth.<ref name="Maurizio Tosi 1993, pp. 745-61">Maurizio Tosi, "Black Boats of Magan. Some Thoughts on Bronze Age Water Transport in Oman and beyond from the Impressed Bitumen Slabs of Ra's al-Junayz", in A. Parpola (ed), South Asian Archaeology 1993, Helsinki, 1995, pp. 745–761 (in collaboration with Serge Cleuziou)</ref>

However, the evidence of sea-borne trade involving the Harappan civilisation is not firm. In their book ''Rise of Civilization in India and Pakistan'' archaeologists [[Bridget Allchin]] and [[Raymond Allchin]] write: <blockquote>... (p. 173) the settlement at Lothal ... along the east side was a brick basin. It is claimed by its excavator to have been a dockyard, connected by channels to a neighbouring estuary. ... On its edge the excavator discovered several heavily-pierced stones, similar to modern anchor stones employed by traditional seafaring communities of Western India. This interpretation, however, has been challenged, and indeed the published levels of the basin and its entrance relative to the modern sea level seem to argue against it. Leshnik has cogently suggested that it was a tank for the reception of sweet water, channelled from higher ground inland to an area where the local water supplies were anciently, as still today, saline.  We regard either interpretation as still unproven, but favour the latter. ... (p. 188&ndash;189) The discussion of trade focuses attention upon methods of transport.  Several representations of ships are found on seals and graffiti at Harappa, Mohenjo-daro (Figs. 7.15&ndash;7.16], etc, and a terracotta model of a ship, with a stick impressed socket for the mast and eyeholes for fixing rigging comes from Lothal.  We have already seen above that the great brick tank, interpreted by Rao as a dock at Lothal, cannot yet be certainly identified. The evidence of sea trade and contact during the Harappan period is largely circumstantial, or derived from inferences from the Mesopotamian texts, as detailed above. (Figure 7. 15 had caption: Mohenjo-daro: representation of ship on a stone seal (length 4.3 cm) (after Mackay).  Figure 7.16 Mohenjo-daro: representation of ship on terracotta amulet (length 4.5 cm) after Dales)</blockquote>

Daniel T. Potts writes:

<blockquote> It is generally assumed that most trade between the Indus Valley (ancient Meluhha?) and western neighbors proceeded up the Persian Gulf rather than overland. Although there is no incontrovertible proof that this was indeed the case, the distribution of Indus-type artifacts on the Oman peninsula, on Bahrain and in southern Mesopotamia makes it plausible that a series of maritime stages linked the Indus Valley and the Gulf region. If this is accepted, then the presence of [[etched carnelian beads]], a Harappan-style cubical stone weight, and a Harappan-style cylinder seal at Susa (Amiet 1986a, Figs. 92-94) may be evidence of maritime trade between Susa and the Indus Valley in the late 3rd millennium BCE. On the other hand, given that similar finds, particularly etched carnelian beads, are attested at landlocked sites including Tepe Hissar (Tappe Heṣār), Shah Tepe (Šāh-Tappe), Kalleh Nisar (Kalla Nisār), Jalalabad (Jalālābād), Marlik (Mārlik) and Tepe Yahya (Tappe Yaḥyā) (Possehl 1996, pp. 153-54), other mechanisms, including overland traffic by peddlers or caravans, may account for their presence at Susa.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia|encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Iranica|title=Maritime Trade i. Pre-Islamic Period|url=http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/maritime-trade-i-pre-islamic-period|access-date=2023-02-14|last=Potts|first=Daniel T.|year=2009|archive-date=27 September 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180927030247/http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/maritime-trade-i-pre-islamic-period|url-status=live}}</ref></blockquote>

In the 1980s, important archaeological discoveries were made at [[Ras al-Jinz]] ([[Oman]]), demonstrating maritime Indus Valley connections with the [[Arabian Peninsula]].<ref name="Maurizio Tosi 1993, pp. 745-61"/><ref>Maurizio Tosi: ''Die Indus-Zivilisation jenseits des indischen Subkontinents'', in: ''Vergessene Städte am Indus'', Mainz am Rhein 1987, {{ISBN|3-8053-0957-0}}, S. 132–133</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.visitoman.nl/pdf/RAJ%20English%20brochure%20copy.pdf |title=Ras Al Jinz |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160910032138/http://www.visitoman.nl/pdf/RAJ%20English%20brochure%20copy.pdf |archive-date=10 September 2016 |url-status=dead |publisher=Ras Al Jinz Visitor Center }}</ref>

Dennys Frenez recently regards that:

<blockquote>Indus-type and Indus-related artifacts were found over a large and differentiated [[ecumene]], encompassing Central Asia, the Iranian Plateau, Mesopotamia and the northern Levant, the Persian Gulf, and the Oman Peninsula. The discovery of Indus trade tools (seals, weights, and containers) across the entire Middle Asia, complemented by information from Mesopotamian cuneiform texts, shows that entrepreneurs from the Indus Valley regularly ventured into these regions to transact with the local socioeconomic and political entities. However, Indus artifacts were also exchanged beyond this core region, eventually reaching as far [as] the Nile River valley, Anatolia, and the Caucasus. On the contrary, only a handful of exotic trade tools and commodities have been found at sites in the Greater Indus Valley. The success of Indus trade in Central and Western Asia did not only rely on the dynamic entrepreneurialism of Indus merchants and the exotic commodities they offered. Specific products were proactively designed and manufactured in the Indus Valley to fulfill the particular needs of foreign markets, and Indus craftspeople moved beyond their native cultural sphere adapting their distinctive productions to the taste of foreign elites or reworking indigenous models. The adoption of specific seals and iconographies to regulate external trade activities suggests a conscious attempt at implementing a coordinated supraregional marketing strategy[...]<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia|encyclopedia=Asian History|title=Indus Valley: Early Commercial Connections with Central and Western Asia
|url=https://oxfordre.com/asianhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190277727.001.0001/acrefore-9780190277727-e-595|access-date=2023-12-15|last= Frenez | first= Dennys|year= 2023| doi=10.1093/acrefore/9780190277727.013.595|isbn=978-0-19-027772-7
}}</ref></blockquote>

=== Agriculture ===
According to Gangal et al. (2014), there is strong archeological and geographical evidence that neolithic farming spread from the Near East into north-west India, but there is also "good evidence for the local domestication of barley and the [[zebu]] cattle at Mehrgarh."{{sfn|Gangal|Sarson|Shukurov|2014}}{{refn|group=lower-alpha|name=Gangal|Gangal refers to {{harvp|Jarrige|2008a}} and {{harvp|Costantini|2008}}}}

According to Jean-Francois Jarrige, farming had an independent local origin at Mehrgarh, which he argues is not merely a "'backwater' of the Neolithic culture of the Near East", despite similarities between Neolithic sites from eastern Mesopotamia and the western Indus valley which are evidence of a "cultural continuum" between those sites.{{sfn|Jarrige|2008a}} Archaeologist [[Jim G. Shaffer]] writes that the Mehrgarh site "demonstrates that food production was an indigenous South Asian phenomenon" and that the data support interpretation of "the prehistoric urbanisation and complex social organisation in South Asia as based on indigenous, but not isolated, cultural developments".{{sfn|Shaffer|1999|p=245}}

Jarrige notes that the people of [[Mehrgarh]] used domesticated wheats and [[barley]],<ref>{{cite journal |last=Jarrige |first=J.-F.|year=1986 |title=Excavations at Mehrgarh-Nausharo |journal=Pakistan Archaeology |volume=10 |issue=22 |pages=63–131}}</ref> while Shaffer and Liechtenstein note that the major cultivated cereal crop was naked six-row barley, a crop derived from two-row barley.<ref>Shaffer and Liechtenstein 1995, 1999.{{full citation needed|date=March 2021}}</ref> Gangal agrees that "Neolithic domesticated crops in Mehrgarh include more than 90% barley," noting that "there is good evidence for the local domestication of barley." Yet, Gangal also notes that the crop also included "a small amount of wheat," which "are suggested to be of Near-Eastern origin, as the modern distribution of wild varieties of wheat is limited to Northern Levant and Southern Turkey."{{sfn|Gangal|Sarson|Shukurov|2014}}{{refn|group=lower-alpha|Gangal refers to {{harvp|Fuller|2006}}}}

The cattle that are often portrayed on Indus seals are humped [[Indian aurochs]] (''Bos primigenius namadicus''), which are similar to [[Zebu]] cattle. Zebu cattle are still common in India, and in Africa. They are different from European cattle (''Bos primigenius taurus''), and are believed to have been independently domesticated on the Indian subcontinent, probably in the [[Baluchistan, Pakistan|Baluchistan region]] of Pakistan.{{sfn|Gallego Romero|2011}}{{sfn|Gangal|Sarson|Shukurov|2014}}{{refn|group=lower-alpha|name=Gangal}}

Research by J. Bates et al. (2016) confirms that Indus populations were the earliest people to use complex multi-cropping strategies across both seasons, growing foods during summer (rice, millets and beans) and winter (wheat, barley and pulses), which required different watering regimes.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Bates |first=J. |year=1986 |title=Approaching rice domestication in South Asia: New evidence from Indus settlements in northern India |journal=Journal of Archaeological Science |volume=78 |issue=22 |pages=193–201|doi=10.1016/j.jas.2016.04.018 |pmid=33414573 |pmc=7773629 |bibcode=2017JArSc..78..193B |doi-access=free }}</ref> Bates et al. (2016) also found evidence for an entirely separate domestication process of rice in ancient South Asia, based around the wild species ''Oryza nivara''. This led to the local development of a mix of "wetland" and "dryland" agriculture of local ''Oryza sativa indica'' rice agriculture, before the truly "wetland" rice ''Oryza sativa japonica'' arrived around 2000 BCE.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Bates |first1=Jennifer |title=Rice farming in India much older than thought, used as 'summer crop' by Indus civilisation |url=http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/rice-farming-in-india-much-older-than-thought-used-as-summer-crop-by-indus-civilisation |access-date=21 November 2016 |publisher=Research |date=21 November 2016 |archive-date=30 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190330181751/https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/rice-farming-in-india-much-older-than-thought-used-as-summer-crop-by-indus-civilisation |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== Food ===
According to archeological finds, the Indus Valley civilisation had a diet dominated by meats of animals such as cattle, buffalo, goat, pig and chicken.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/science/story/indus-valley-civilization-diet-had-dominance-of-meat-finds-study-1748530-2020-12-11|title=Indus Valley civilization diet had dominance of meat, finds study|website=India Today|date=11 December 2020|access-date=22 July 2022|archive-date=22 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220722035534/https://www.indiatoday.in/science/story/indus-valley-civilization-diet-had-dominance-of-meat-finds-study-1748530-2020-12-11|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://scroll.in/latest/980808/indus-valley-civilisation-had-meat-heavy-diets-reveals-study|title=Indus Valley civilisation had meat-heavy diets, preference for beef, reveals study|website=Scroll|date=10 December 2020|access-date=22 July 2022|archive-date=22 July 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220722035443/https://scroll.in/latest/980808/indus-valley-civilisation-had-meat-heavy-diets-reveals-study|url-status=live}}</ref> Remnants of dairy products were also discovered. According to Akshyeta Suryanarayan et al.,{{efn|A large proportion of data however remains ambiguous. Reliable local isotopic references for fats and oils are unavailable, and lipid levels in IVC vessels are quite low.}} available evidence indicates culinary practices to be common over the region; food-constituents were dairy products (in low proportion), ruminant carcass meat, and either non-ruminant adipose fats, plants, or mixtures of these products.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|display-authors=4 |last1=Suryanarayan |first1=Akshyeta |last2=Cubas |first2=Miriam |last3=Craig |first3=Oliver E. |last4=Heron |first4=Carl P. |last5=Vasant S. |first5=Shinde |last6=Singh |first6=Ravindra N. |last7=O'Connell |first7=Tamsin C. |last8=Petrie |first8=Cameron A. |date=January 2021 |title=Lipid residues in pottery from the Indus Civilisation in northwest India |journal=Journal of Archaeological Science |volume=125 |at=105291 |doi=10.1016/j.jas.2020.105291 |pmid=33519031 |pmc=7829615 |bibcode=2021JArSc.125j5291S |issn=0305-4403 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The dietary pattern remained the same throughout the decline.<ref name=":2" />

Seven food-balls ("[[laddu]]s") were found in intact form, along with two figurines of bulls and a hand-held copper adze, during excavations in 2017 from western [[Rajasthan]].<ref name=":0" /> Dated to about 2600 BCE, they were likely composed of legumes, primarily [[Mung bean|mung]], and cereals.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Agnihotri|first=Rajesh|date=1 June 2021|title=Microscopic, biochemical and stable isotopic investigation of seven multi-nutritional food-balls from Indus archaeological site, Rajasthan (India)|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352409X21001292|journal=Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports|language=en|volume=37|pages=102917|doi=10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.102917|bibcode=2021JArSR..37j2917A|s2cid=233578846|issn=2352-409X|access-date=21 June 2021|archive-date=24 June 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210624202932/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352409X21001292|url-status=live}}</ref> The authors speculated the food-balls to be of a ritualistic significance, given the finds of bull figurines, [[adze]] and a seal in immediate vicinity.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1">{{Cite web|last=Tewari|first=Mohita|date=25 March 2021|title=Harappan people ate multigrain, high-protein 'laddoos': Study – Times of India|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/education/news/harappan-people-ate-multigrain-high-protein-laddoos-study/articleshow/81684776.cms|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220219112112/https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/education/news/harappan-people-ate-multigrain-high-protein-laddoos-study/articleshow/81684776.cms|archive-date=19 February 2022|url-status=live|access-date=21 June 2021|website=The Times of India}}</ref>

=== Language ===
{{see also|Substratum in Vedic Sanskrit|l1=Substratum in Vedic Sanskrit|Harappan language|l2=Harappan language|Dravidian peoples#Origins|l3=Origins of Dravidian peoples}}
The [[Harappan language]] is the unknown language (or languages) of the Indus Valley civilization. The [[Indus script|Harappan script]] is yet undeciphered, indeed it has not even been demonstrated to be a writing system, and therefore the language remains unknown.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-03-06 |title=India - Agriculture and animal husbandry {{!}} Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/place/India/Agriculture-and-animal-husbandry#ref46830 |access-date=2023-06-02 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230306022746/https://www.britannica.com/place/India/Agriculture-and-animal-husbandry#ref46830 |archive-date=2023-03-06 }}</ref> The language being yet unattested in readable contemporary sources, hypotheses regarding its nature are based on possible [[loanword]]s, the [[substratum in Vedic Sanskrit]], and some terms recorded in [[Sumerian cuneiform]] (such as ''[[Meluhha]]''), in conjunction with analyses of the [[Indus script|Harappan script]].

There are some possible loanwords from the language of the Indus Valley civilization. ''{{transliteration|sux|Meluḫḫa}}'' or ''{{transliteration|sux|Melukhkha}}'' ({{langx|sux|{{cuneiform|𒈨𒈛𒄩[[𒆠]]}}}} {{transliteration|sux|Me-luḫ-ḫa<sup>KI</sup>}}) is the [[Sumerian language|Sumerian]] name of a prominent trading partner of [[Sumer]] during the [[Middle Bronze Age]]. Its identification remains an open question, but most scholars associate it with the [[Indus Valley civilisation|Indus Valley Civilisation]]. Of the [[substratum in Vedic Sanskrit]], the bulk have no proven basis in any of the known families, suggesting a source in one or more lost languages. One of these lost languages could have been the Harappan language, which Witzel labelled as the Kubhā-Vipāś [[Substrate (linguistics)|substrate]].<ref name=Witzel09>{{cite journal|first=Michael |last=Witzel |title=The linguistic history of some Indian domestic plants |journal=Journal of Biosciences |volume= 34 |issue= 6 |date=December 2009 |pages= 829–833 |doi=10.1007/s12038-009-0096-1|pmid=20093735 |s2cid=6245657 |url=https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/8954814/Witzel_Linguistic.pdf?sequence=1 |type=Submitted manuscript }}</ref>

One hypothesis has been suggested that the bearers of the IVC corresponded to [[proto-Dravidian]]s linguistically, the break-up of proto-Dravidian corresponding to the break-up of the [[Late Harappan]] culture.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.harappa.com/script/parpola0.html|title=Deciphering the Indus Script &#124; Harappa|website=www.harappa.com|access-date=8 October 2022|archive-date=6 November 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181106183006/https://www.harappa.com/script/parpola0.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Finnish Indologist [[Asko Parpola]] concludes that the uniformity of the Indus inscriptions precludes any possibility of widely different languages being used, and that an early form of Dravidian language must have been the language of the Indus people.<ref>{{cite web |title=Sanskrit has also contributed to Indus Civilization |work=Deccan Herald |date=12 August 2012 |url=http://www.deccanherald.com/content/79062/sanskrit-has-contributed-indus-civilisation.html |access-date=14 August 2012 |archive-date=30 December 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101230104343/http://www.deccanherald.com/content/79062/sanskrit-has-contributed-indus-civilisation.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Today, the [[Dravidian language]] family is concentrated mostly in [[southern India]] and northern and eastern [[Sri Lanka]], but pockets of it still remain throughout the rest of India and Pakistan (the [[Brahui language]]), which lends credence to the theory.

=== Possible writing system ===
{{Main|Indus script}}
[[File:The 'Ten Indus Scripts' discovered near the northern gateway of the Dholavira citadel.jpg|thumb |upright=1.35|Ten [[Indus script|Indus characters]] from the northern gate of [[Dholavira]], dubbed the [[Dholavira#Sign board|Dholavira signboard]]]]

Between 400 and as many as 600&nbsp;distinct Indus symbols<ref>{{cite book |last=Wells |first=B. |title=An Introduction to Indus Writing |series=Early Sites Research Society (West) Monograph Series |volume=2 |location=Independence, MO |year=1999}}</ref> have been found on [[stamp seal]]s, small tablets, ceramic pots and more than a dozen other materials, including a "signboard" that apparently once hung over the gate of the inner citadel of the Indus city of Dholavira. Typical [[Indus inscriptions]] are around five characters in length,<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mahadevan |first1=Iravatham |author-link=Iravatham Mahadevan |title=The Indus Script: Text, Concordance And Tables |date=1977 |location=New Delhi |publisher=Archaeological Survey of India |url=https://archive.org/details/masi77indusscripttextsconcordancestablesiravathammahadevanalt_443_h |page=9}}</ref> most of which (aside from the Dholavira "signboard") are tiny; the longest on any single object (inscribed on a [[Indian copper plate inscriptions|copper plate]]<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Shinde |first1=Vasant |last2=Willis |first2=Rick J. |year=2014 |title=A New Type of Inscribed Copper Plate from Indus Valley (Harappan) Civilisation |url=https://ancient-asia-journal.com/upload/1/volume/Vol.%205%20(2014)/Paper/63-1-725-1-10-20141008.pdf |journal=Ancient Asia |volume=5 |doi=10.5334/aa.12317 |doi-access=free |access-date=27 January 2024 |archive-date=27 January 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240127191053/https://ancient-asia-journal.com/upload/1/volume/Vol.%205%20(2014)/Paper/63-1-725-1-10-20141008.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>) has a length of 34&nbsp;symbols.

While the Indus Valley Civilisation is generally characterised as a literate society on the evidence of these inscriptions, this description has been challenged by Farmer, Sproat, and Witzel (2004)<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Farmer, Steve |author2=Sproat, Richard |author3=Witzel, Michael |url=http://www.safarmer.com/fsw2.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050207073634/http://www.safarmer.com/fsw2.pdf |archive-date=7 February 2005 |url-status=live|title=The Collapse of the Indus-Script Thesis: The Myth of a Literate Harappan Civilization |date=2004 |journal=Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies |pages=19–57 |issn=1084-7561}}</ref> who argue that the Indus system did not encode language, but was instead similar to a variety of non-linguistic sign systems used extensively in the Near East and other societies, to symbolise families, clans, gods, and religious concepts. Others have claimed on occasion that the symbols were exclusively used for economic transactions, but this claim leaves unexplained the appearance of Indus symbols on many ritual objects, many of which were mass-produced in [[Moulding (process)|moulds]]. No parallels to these mass-produced inscriptions are known in any other early ancient civilisations.<ref>These and other issues are addressed in {{harvp|Parpola|2005}}</ref>

In a 2009 study by P.N. Rao et al. published in [[Science (journal)|''Science'']], computer scientists, comparing the pattern of symbols to various linguistic scripts and non-linguistic systems, including DNA and a computer programming language, found that the Indus script's pattern is closer to that of spoken words, supporting the hypothesis that it codes for an as-yet-unknown language.<ref>{{cite journal |display-authors=4 |first1=Rajesh P.N. |last1=Rao |first2=Nisha |last2=Yadav |first3=Mayank N. |last3=Vahia |first4=Hrishikesh |last4=Joglekar |first5=R. |last5=Adhikari |first6=Iravatham |last6=Mahadevan|date=May 2009 |title=Entropic Evidence for Linguistic Structure in the Indus Script |journal=Science |volume=324 |issue=5931 |page=1165 |doi=10.1126/science.1170391 |pmid=19389998 |bibcode=2009Sci...324.1165R |s2cid=15565405|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Indus Script Encodes Language, Reveals New Study of Ancient Symbols |agency=Newswise |url=http://newswise.com/articles/view/551380/ |access-date=5 June 2009 |archive-date=11 August 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090811035516/http://newswise.com/articles/view/551380/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

Farmer, Sproat, and Witzel have disputed this finding, pointing out that Rao et al. did not actually compare the Indus signs with "real-world non-linguistic systems" but rather with "two wholly artificial systems invented by the authors, one consisting of 200,000&nbsp;randomly ordered signs and another of 200,000&nbsp;fully ordered signs, that they spuriously claim represent the structures of all real-world non-linguistic sign systems".<ref>[http://www.safarmer.com/Refutation3.pdf A Refutation of the Claimed Refutation of the Non-linguistic Nature of Indus Symbols: Invented Data Sets in the Statistical Paper of Rao et al. (Science, 2009)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190717170734/http://www.safarmer.com/Refutation3.pdf |date=17 July 2019 }} Retrieved on 19 September 2009.{{full citation needed|date=May 2019}}</ref> Farmer et al. have also demonstrated that a comparison of a non-linguistic system like [[medieval]] [[Heraldry|heraldic signs]] with [[natural language]]s yields results similar to those that Rao et al. obtained with Indus signs. They conclude that the method used by Rao et al. cannot distinguish linguistic systems from non-linguistic ones.<ref name="RAO">[http://www.safarmer.com/more.on.Rao.pdf 'Conditional Entropy' Cannot Distinguish Linguistic from Non-linguistic Systems] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190717163301/http://www.safarmer.com/more.on.Rao.pdf |date=17 July 2019 }} Retrieved on 19 September 2009.{{full citation needed|date=May 2019}}</ref>

The messages on the seals have proved to be too short to be decoded by a computer. Each seal has a distinctive combination of symbols and there are too few examples of each sequence to provide a sufficient context. The symbols that accompany the images vary from seal to seal, making it impossible to derive a meaning for the symbols from the images. There have, nonetheless, been a number of interpretations offered for the meaning of the seals. These interpretations have been marked by ambiguity and subjectivity.<ref name="RAO" />{{rp|69}}

Photos of many of the thousands of extant inscriptions are published in the ''Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions'' (1987, 1991, 2010), edited by [[Asko Parpola]] and his colleagues. The most recent volume republished photos taken in the 1920s and 1930s of hundreds of lost or stolen inscriptions, along with many discovered in the last few decades; formerly, researchers had to supplement the materials in the ''Corpus'' by study of the tiny photos in the excavation reports of Marshall (1931), MacKay (1938, 1943), Wheeler (1947), or reproductions in more recent scattered sources.

=== Religion ===
[[File:Shiva Pashupati.jpg|thumb|The ''[[Pashupati seal]]'', showing a seated figure surrounded by animals]]
[[File:IndusValleySeals swastikas.JPG|thumb|[[Swastika]] seals of Indus Valley Civilisation in [[British Museum]]]]
{{main|Religion of the Indus Valley Civilization}}
{{further|Prehistoric religion}}

The religion and belief system of the Indus Valley people has received considerable attention, especially from the view of identifying precursors to deities and religious practices of [[Indian religions]] that later developed in the area. However, due to the sparsity of evidence, which is open to varying interpretations, and the fact that the Indus script remains undeciphered, the conclusions are partly speculative and largely based on a retrospective view from a much later Hindu perspective.{{Sfn|Wright|2009|pp=281–282}}

Early and influential work in the area that set the trend for Hindu interpretations of archaeological evidence from the Harappan sites{{sfn|Ratnagar|2004}} was that of [[John Marshall (archaeologist)|John Marshall]], who in 1931 identified the following as prominent features of the Indus religion: a Great Male God and a Mother Goddess; deification or veneration of animals and plants; a symbolic representation of the phallus ([[linga]]) and vulva ([[yoni]]); and, use of baths and water in religious practice. Marshall's interpretations have been much debated, and sometimes disputed over the following decades.{{sfn|Marshall|1931|pp=48–78}}{{sfn|Possehl|2002|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XVgeAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA154 141–156]}}

One Indus Valley seal shows a seated figure with a horned headdress, possibly [[tricephalic]] and possibly [[ithyphallic]], surrounded by animals. Marshall identified the figure as an early form of the Hindu god [[Shiva]] (or [[Rudra]]), who is associated with [[Asceticism#Hinduism|asceticism]], [[yoga]], and [[Lingam|linga]]; regarded as a [[Pashupati|lord of animals]], and often depicted as having three eyes. The seal has hence come to be known as the [[Pashupati Seal]], after ''[[Pashupati]]'' (lord of all animals), an epithet of Shiva.{{sfn|Marshall|1931|pp=48–78}}{{sfn|Possehl|2002|pp=141–144}} While Marshall's work has earned some support, many critics and even supporters have raised several objections. [[Doris Meth Srinivasan|Doris Srinivasan]] has argued that the figure does not have three faces or yogic posture and that in [[Vedas|Vedic literature]] Rudra was not a protector of wild animals.{{sfn|Srinivasan|1975}}{{sfn|Srinivasan|1997|pp=180–181}} Herbert Sullivan and [[Alf Hiltebeitel]] also rejected Marshall's conclusions, with the former claiming that the figure was female, while the latter associated the figure with ''Mahisha'', the Buffalo God and the surrounding animals with [[vahana]]s (vehicles) of deities for the four cardinal directions.{{sfn|Sullivan|1964}}{{sfn|Hiltebeitel|2011|pp=399–432}} Writing in 2002, [[Gregory L. Possehl]] concluded that while it would be appropriate to recognise the figure as a deity, its association with the water buffalo, and its posture as one of ritual discipline, regarding it as a proto-Shiva would be going too far.{{sfn|Possehl|2002|pp=141–144}} Despite the criticisms of Marshall's association of the seal with a proto-Shiva icon, it has been interpreted as the [[Tirthankara]] [[Rishabhanatha]] by some scholars of [[Jainism]] like [[Vilas Sangave]].<ref>{{cite book |author=Vilas Sangave |year=2001 |title=Facets of Jainology: Selected Research Papers on Jain Society, Religion, and Culture |publisher=Popular Prakashan |location=Mumbai |isbn=978-81-7154-839-2 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2FGSGmP4jNcC}}</ref> Historians such as [[Heinrich Zimmer]] and [[Thomas McEvilley]] believe that there is a connection between first Jain Tirthankara Rishabhanatha and the Indus Valley Civilisation.<ref>{{cite book |title=Philosophies of India|last=Zimmer |first=Heinrich |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=1969 |isbn=978-0-691-01758-7 |editor-last=Campbell |editor-first=Joseph |location=NY |pages=60, 208–209}}</ref><ref>[[Thomas McEvilley]] (2002) ''The Shape of Ancient Thought: Comparative Studies in Greek and Indian Philosophies''. Allworth Communications, Inc. 816 pages; {{ISBN|1-58115-203-5}}</ref>

Marshall hypothesised the existence of a cult of Mother Goddess worship based upon excavation of several female figurines and thought that this was a precursor of the Hindu sect of [[Shaktism]]. However the function of the female figurines in the life of Indus Valley people remains unclear, and Possehl does not regard the evidence for Marshall's hypothesis to be "terribly robust".{{sfn|Possehl|2002|pp=141–145}} Some of the [[baetyl]]s interpreted by Marshall to be sacred phallic representations are now thought to have been used as pestles or game counters instead, while the ring stones that were thought to symbolise ''yoni'' were determined to be architectural features used to stand pillars, although the possibility of their religious symbolism cannot be eliminated.{{sfn|McIntosh|2008|pp=286–287}} Many Indus Valley seals show animals, with some depicting them being carried in processions, while others show [[Chimera (mythology)|chimeric creations]]. One seal from Mohenjo-daro shows a half-human, a half-buffalo monster attacking a tiger, which may be a reference to the [[Sumerian religion|Sumerian myth]] of such a monster created by goddess [[Aruru (goddess)|Aruru]] to fight [[Gilgamesh]].{{sfn|Marshall|1931|p=67}}

In contrast to contemporary [[Ancient Egypt|Egyptian]] and [[Ancient Near East|Mesopotamian]] civilisations, Indus Valley lacks any monumental palaces, even though excavated cities indicate that the society possessed the requisite engineering knowledge.{{sfn|Possehl|2002|p=18}}{{sfn|Thapar|2004|p=85}} This may suggest that religious ceremonies if any, may have been largely confined to individual homes, small temples, or the open air. Several sites have been proposed by Marshall and later scholars as possibly devoted to religious purposes, but at present only the [[Great Bath]] at Mohenjo-daro is widely thought to have been so used, as a place for ritual purification.{{sfn|Possehl|2002|pp=141–145}}{{sfn|McIntosh|2008|pp=275–277, 292}} The funerary practices of the Harappan civilisation are marked by fractional burial (in which the body is reduced to skeletal remains by exposure to the elements before final interment), and even cremation.{{sfn|Possehl|2002|pp=152, 157–176}}{{sfn|McIntosh|2008|pp=293–299}}