A supposed Sumero‑Babylonian inscription discovered at Mohenjo-Daro
Summary
A supposed Sumero-Babylonian inscription discovered at Mohenjo-Daro, published by Dr. C. L. Fabri in *Indian Culture* (1937), claims to show Sumerian-Babylonian influence in the Indus Valley Civilization. Fabri argued the inscription on a pottery fragment dates to ~2,600 B.C., supported by Assyriologist Franz M. Th. Bohl. However, scholars like C. J. Gadd noted inconsistencies: the inscription’s raised characters (filled with white substance) lack the impressed, sunken features typical of Proto-Indian seals or Mesopotamian cuneiform. The signs’ broad, wedge-like forms and orientation (visible only when the pot is upside down) suggest they were incised while the pot was inverted, likely due to practical constraints during carving. Fabri interpreted the characters as phonetic and ideographic, linking them to Dravidian terms (e.g., “pot” for a leg sign). However, the inscription’s unusual orientation and execution diverge from known Proto-Indian or Mesopotamian practices. While some signs resemble Harappan seals, the overall composition remains contentious. The debate highlights challenges in attributing hybrid cultural influences without conclusive evidence. Post-publication analyses emphasize the need for caution in interpreting ambiguous inscriptions from ancient Indus Valley artifacts.
Summary reviewed by a volunteer editor.
Conclusion
This analysis challenges Dr. Fabri’s interpretation of the Mohenjo-Daro inscription, demonstrating that the supposed Sumero-Babylonian script is likely a misreading of sunken, non-relief characters incised into the pot’s surface. The inscription’s true features—broad, wedge-shaped signs—align with known Proto-Indian seals and Harappan pottery inscriptions, suggesting a native script rather than a foreign one. The discovery underscores bidirectional cultural exchanges: while Sumero-Babylonian influence may exist, the inscription itself reflects Proto-Indian scribal practices, reinforcing the need to re-examine cross-cultural claims in Indus Valley artifacts. The findings emphasize the importance of contextual analysis in deciphering ancient scripts and highlight the inscription’s significance as a potential key to understanding indigenous writing systems of the period.