Talk:Harappa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Archaeology (Rated B-Class) Archaeology Portal This article is part of WikiProject Archaeology, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. WikiProject Pakistan     (Rated Start-Class) This article is part of WikiProject Pakistan which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan and Pakistan-related topics. This article is related to History of Pakistan. For guidelines see WikiProject History of Pakistan and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) Additional information This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Article is property cited: criterion not met Article has one or more sections including LEAD: criterion not met Article is comprehensive: criterion not met Article includes some graphics (i.e., pictures or infoboxes): criterion not met Article is free of grammatical errors: criterion not met High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. WikiProject India (Rated B-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject India. B Quality: B-Class (add comments) This article is maintained by the Indian history workgroup. More information about this article... High Importance: high by India

Contents 1 Organized 2 Dates 3 Script 4 Indian Tag 5 Sanskrit script in this article 6 Copyvios and Irrelevant Sections 7 Picture?

[edit] Organized

Is it possible to organize this article into various parts, like

• 1. Overview
• 2. History
• 3. Culture
• 4. People (Inhabitants)
• 5. Architechture
• 6. Recent developments/discoveries, etc.

[edit] Dates

I agree with the above. In addition, there appears to be a significant inconsistency in the dates?:

"The city existed from about 3300 BCE..." followed by "Indus Valley civilization (known also as Harappan culture) appeared around 2500 B.C...."

82.133.100.35 01:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Script

I thought someone decoded it and discovered it was Vedic Sanskrit? Arrow740 11:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Any reference? Szhaider 11:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The indus script has not been decoded. Not a word of it. Unre4L 00:07, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Indian Tag

Pre-1947 Indian tag is now much better without Ashoka Chakra. Now it's neutral and does not imply Hindu dominance. Szhaider 18:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The Ashoka chakra is not anything related to Hindu dominance. It is the Buddhist Wheel of Dharma ­ Kris (talk) 21:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

As it is also a part of the flag of predominantly Hindu India (more properly known as Bhaarat in Hindi), therefore, it is not acceptable. Szhaider 23:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

That's not a good reason. India is a secular country. The Wheel of Dharma is common to all Dharmic faiths such as Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism, though its more popular as a buddhist motif. It has nothing to do with Hindu dominance or anything. Besides Harappans were very much Hindu as the figurines of swastika and pasupati found in Harappa show. ­ Kris (talk) 16:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sanskrit script in this article

If the justification for the need for sanskrit script in this article is that this site was part of the Indus Valley Civilisation, then is there any proof for the existance of Sanskrit during the Indus Valley civ days? Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 10:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there any proof of urdu back in the indus valley days?--D-Boy 12:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Indus Valley Civilization was an Indian civilization even though Harappa today is located in a political entity called Pakistan created in the recent past. There are more IVC excavated sites in Indian territory than in Pakistan. Sanskrit did exist in Harappan times since its origin dates back to pre-historic times and it existed even before Rig Vedic times (see Rig_veda#Dating_and_historical_reconstruction). There is no harm in retaining both devanagari and urdu scripts for the name. And yes, history of Harappa is also the history of Pakistan. ­ Kris (talk) 16:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The physical location of the site is in the modern state of Pakistan and hence following conventions, Urdu should be there, although I'm opposed to any vernacular script in the English language encyclopedia. The Sanskrit language did not exist during the Indus valley days. Atleast there is no proof for such an existance. I see no need for inserting Sanskrit here. Thanks Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 18:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no policy about the scripts. But if the urdu is there, then the sanskrit should be there as well. pakistan didn't exsist back then.--D-Boy 09:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

India didnt exist either, and the Harrapan people didnt have anything to do with Sanskrit. It is a Pakistani civilisation, and last time I checked, Sanskrit didnt play a major role in in this era. Just remember, India is not another word for South Asia.
Have a nice day. --Unre4LITY 01:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

first off, pakistan did not even exist. second, niether did urdu.--D-Boy 08:33, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Most importantly Sanskrit didn't exist during the Indus Valley Civilisation either. Thanks Parthi ^{talk/contribs} 11:20, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Even more Importantly India didnt exist. And since its located in Pakistan, Pakistan is the home of it. Unre4LITY 18:57, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the need for Sanskrit in the first paragraph. The IVC pre-dates Sanskrit. The only reason why "Urdu" appears there is that Harrappa is in modern-day Pakistan and Urdu is the national language of Pakistan. Harrappa has nothing to do exclusively with "Pakistani civilization." It was part of an Ancient civilization on the Indian subcontinent that is now a part of Pakistan. Sanskrit did have a lot to do with the area of present-day Harrappa and indeed even regions farther west (e.g. the grammarian Pāṇini hailed from Gandhara), but that was much later in history when the IVC was long gone. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I only script which is suitable for the article is the Indus script, which is of course undeciphered at the moment. Sanskrit and Urdu weren't spoken in the civilisation, so both should go. Gizza^{Chat ©} 12:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Harappa is also a present-day city in Punjab, Pakistan (in addition to being a IVC site). For that reason, it is valid for Urdu (or Punjabi written in Urdu script) to appear in its name, in the same way that Gujarati appears in the name of Lothal, but no Sanskrit does. Lothal (Gujarātī: લોથલ, IPA: [ˈloːtʰəl], English: Mound of the dead). Gujarati, of course, didn't exist at the time of IVC either. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Its about the time people stopped arguing over scripts! As I see it Urdu stays Sanskrit goes... Amey Aryan DaBrood^© 21:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

PS. Incidentally, Mohenjo-daro has the Urdu and Sindhi scripts, but no Sanskrit. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

It still find the modern languages pretty useless considering that none of these cities still exist. They have more reason to stay than Sanskrit, which probably flourished in these cities from around 1500 B.C. to 500 A.D. Gizza^{Chat ©} 21:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The 1500BCE timeline is just a conservative date for the completion of the Rig Veda, and the Rig Veda was composed over a period of hundreds of years. So definitely Sanskrit must have existed in the region for a long time before the Vedas were composed, since it was sufficiently evolved enough by the time the Vedas were composed. It is very likely that the Indus Valley civilization could have been the Vedic Civilization, see Pashupati & Swastika#Archaeological_record. The weights and measures later used in Kautilya's Arthashastra (4th century BC) are the same as those used in Lothal (see Indus_valley#Science). Further the Vedic Sarasvati is said to have dried up between 5000BC and 3000BC (see Sarasvati_river#Identification). All this suggests that Sanskrit is the strongest contender for the language of the Harappan people, pending actual decipherment of their script. So Sanskrit should find a place in Harappa related articles, if a totally unrelated language like Urdu can be included based on present-day political boundaries. ­ Kris (talk) 23:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Srkris, Swastikas aren't mentioned in any of the Vedas and Pashupati is only mentioned in the fourth one. Hinduism is a mixture of Vedic and native beliefs. Many of the native beliefs are also found in IVC. None of the Vedic beliefs and devatas are. I didn't see any murtis of Indra, Agni or Surya in the IVC excavation. I myself like many Hindus believe that the Vedas are ananta/sanatan (eternal, never created) but non-Hindu academics and scholars all agree that IVC is not connected with the Vedas. Some people like Tilak claim the Vedas were created in the Artic region during the Ice Age. And most importanty if Sanskrit was spoken in the IVC, it should be in the Indus script not Devanagari obviously. And nobody can decipher the IVC script. If you want Urdu to be reomved, on the same premises Gujarati will have to be removed from Lothal. Gizza^{Chat ©} 00:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvios and Irrelevant Sections

It seems that at 18:06, on 27 October 2006 a large portion of text was added by user:203.128.22.67. Upon examination, the text shows verbatim or minimally paraphrased "cut and paste"s from at least one website: Harappan Culture (from Library of Congress Country Studies). It seems also that after that well-meaning editors tried to incorporate the text into various sections, some of which are irrelevant to the subject at hand. These sections are:

• Socio-political system
• Religion, and
• Other influences

The sections belong properly to WP pages like Gandhara and Taxila, but not to Harappa. I am therefore removing these sections. I will also paraphrase two other sections and give the relevant web site as citation. However, please in the future: no cut-and-past copyvios. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picture?

I seem to remember there being a picture on this page. Was there? I would add one but I don't know how.--Onceonthisisland 14:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC)