सुमेरियन मोहरें से प्राप्त विष्णु और इन्द्र --

INDOSUMERIAN SEALS DECIPHERED THE INDO-SUMERIAN SEALS DECIPHERED WORKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR THE PHOENICIAN ORIGIN OF THE BRITONS, SCOTS, AND ANGLO-SAXONS. With over 100 illustrations and maps. Williams & Norgate, 1924, 2nd impression, 1925. " Dr Waddell's book exercises a convincing effect — his conclusions and dis- coveries are remarkable, and they are advanced in a manner essentially that of the scientific historian. Deduction follows deduction until the complete edifice stands revealed with every stone in place." — Literary Guide, Feb. 1935, For other Press notices, see inset at end. DISCOVERY OF THE LOST PALIBOTHRA OF THE GREEKS. With plates and maps. Bengal Government Press, Calcutta, 1892. " The discovery of the mightiest city of India clearly shows that Indian antiquarian studies are still in their infancy."— Englishman, Mar. 10, 1693. THE EXCAVATIONS AT PALIBOTHRA. With plates, plans and maps. Government Press, Calcutta, 1903. " This interesting story of the discovery of one of the most important sites in Indian history is told in Col. Waddell's report."— Timesof India, Mar. 5, 1904. PLACE, RIVER AND MOUNTAIN NAMES IN THE HIMALAYAS. Asiatic Society, Calcutta, 1892. THE BUDDHISM OF TIBET. With 150 illustrations. W. H. Allen & Co., 1895. " This is a book which considerably extends the domain of human knowledge. Every page contains new materials ; many of his chapters are entirely new, and the whole forms an enduring memorial of laborious original research. He is the first European who, equipped with the resources of modern scholarship, has penetrated the esoteric Buddhism of Tibet."— The Times, Feb. aa, 1895. REPORT ON MISSION FOR COLLECTING GRECO - SCYTHIC SCULPTURES IN SWAT VALLEY. Beng. Gov. Press, 1895. AMONG THE HIMALAYAS. With numerous original illustrations and maps. Constable, 1899. 2nd edition, 1900. "This is one of the most fascinating books we have ever seen." — Daily Chronicle, Jan. 18, 1B99. " Ad<5s in pleasant fashion a great deal to our general store of knowledge."— Geographical Journal, 432, 1899. " One of the most valuable books that has been written on the Himalayas." — Saturday Review, Mar. 4, 1899. WILD TRIBES OF THE BRAHMAPUTRA VALLEY. With plates. Special No. of Asiatic Soc. Journal, Calcutta, 1900. LHASA AND ITS MYSTERIES. With 200 original illustrations and maps. J. Murray, 1905. 3rd edition, 1906. " Rich in information and instinct with literary charm. Every page bears witness to first-hand knowledge of the country ... the author is master of his subject. It is a mine of quaint folk-lore, of philology and natural history, and the descriptions of scenery are delightful . . . there is scarcely a page without some droll suggestion." — Times Literary Supplement, Jan. 31, 1905. " The foremost living authority on his subject. Well illustrated with original photographs, it caters both for the expert and for the ordinary reader." — Daily Chronicle, Mar. 27, 1905. " Of all the books on Tibet this is the most complete and the most authoritative. His perpetual curiosity, his diligent research, his exceptional knowledge, and his vigorous style of writing give to this work both authority and brightness." — Contemporary Review, June 1905. Contributor to ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA, 1909, and to HASTING' S ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF RELIGION AND ETHICS, 190B-1921. Plate t (Frontispiece). THE INDO-SUMERIAN SEALS DECIPHERED DISCOVERING SUMERIANS OF INDUS VALLEY AS PHCENICIANS, B A RATS, GOTHS y FAMOUS VEDIC ARYANS 3100-2300 B.C. L. A. WADDELL LL.D., C.B., CLE. Fellow of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Linnean and Folk-Lore Societies, Hon. Correspondt. Indian Archaeological Survey, Ex-Professor of Tibetan, London University WITH NUMEROUS ILLUSTRATIONS AND MAPS LONDON LUZAC y CO. 46 GREAT RUSSELL STREET, W.C. 1925 All Rights Reserved PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY THE EDINBURGH PRESS, g AND II YOUNG STREET, EDINBURGH PREFACE In my recent work on British Origins, I proved by a mass of new historical evidence that the " Sumerians " — those foremost civilized and civilizing ancient people whose monuments and high art of five thousand years ago are the wonder of the modem world — were the long lost Early Aryans ; that the Phoenicians were not Semites as has been hitherto supposed, but Aryans and the chief colonizing branch of the Sumerians ; and that the people who colonized and civilized India, as well as those who colonized and civilized the Mediterranean, North-western Europe and Britain and who were the ancestors of the Britons, were likewise Aryan and belonged predominantly to the Phoenician branch of that race. These results are now dramatically confirmed, both as regards India and the British Isles, by the discovery in the Indus Valley, a few weeks after the publication of my book, of two large series of ancient seals inscribed with Sumerian writing, unearthed from beneath the foundations of old Buddhist buildings of the third century B.C., to the second century a.d., at widely different sites on the Indus, and associated with the ancient buildings and tombs of the owners of the seals, and cultural objects of ancient Sumerian and Phoenician type. That the writing on these seals was " Sumerian " and of an archaic type I recognized on the first glance at their photographs ; and I found later that Professor Sayce and other Assyriologists had arrived at the like conclusion, but that owing to the writing being slightly different from the straight-lined script of the clay tablets, they had been unable to read a single word of the inscriptions on the seals. V vi INDO-SUMERIAN SEALS DECIPHERED On the other hand, having in my search for Aryan Origins been led by various clues to the conclusion that the Sumerians were Aryans, and devoted a great part of the last twenty years to the study of the ancient Sumerian writing at first hand, the problem of the Indus Valley script was to me a comparatively easy one. So much so that within a day or two of receiving the photographs I was able — and I say so without any wish to boast — to decipher and read the greater part of the inscriptions on the seals. The subsequent weeks before going to press have been spent in revising the decipher- ments — which are now believed to be substantially correct — and in ransacking the Vedas and Indian Epics for the detailed references to the various famous Aryan Vedic kings, princes and priests whose names are inscribed on the seals. The owners of several of these Sumerian seals, I soon observed, bore the names of famous Vedic Aryan seers and princes with whom I had become familiar in the Vedic hymns of the Brahmans, and some of whom were specified therein as living on the banks of the Indus. Most of the others, for fortunately all the seals are engraved with their owners' names with one exception, are identified with other Vedic and Epic Aryan heroes who are disclosed as governors of a colony of seafaring Sumerian or Phoenician merchants and exploiters of the mineral wealth of the Indus Valley, and through the Ravi tributary of the latter the gold-fields of Tibet from about 3100 B.C. The colony was founded by the famous Sumerian king of that epoch, Uruas', the Haryas'wa of the Vedas and Indian Epics, and the " Ur Nina " of Assyriologists, who is gener- ally regarded as the first great dynast of the Early Sumerians ; and he is now disclosed to be a Phoenician, the founder of the First Dynasty of Phoenicians in Mesopotamia, and the son of the great Hercules of the Phoenicians and Greeks, here conclusively identified with the Sumerian epic hero " Gilgamesh " of Erech, and now disclosed for the first time as a historical human Aryan Sumerian Phoenician king and great Sun-priest of Bel of relatively fixed date, about 3150 B.C. PREFACE vii The seals are in fact the official signets and grave-amulets of the administrators with their family priests of a Meso- potamian colony in the distant Indus Valley whose very existence had been hitherto unsuspected by Assyriologists. Some of them are the official signets of famous historical Sumerian and " Akkad " kings of Mesopotamia as suzerains of the colony, including Sargon I, who appears to have personally visited it. And the seals extend down to the end of the Ur Dynasty about 2350 B.C., on the overthrow of that dynasty by its tributary province of Elam, when they suddenly cease, presumably owing to the colony having been lost to Mesopotamia and abandoned. All these Sumerian and " Akkad " kings, governors and priests are duly recorded in the Vedas and Indian Epics as " Aryans " ; and some of them are called " The able Panch " which I have shown is a form of " Phcenic-ian." On their Indus Valley seals, several bear the title of " Aryan " and of " Phoenician " by its more common synonyms, and others call themselves " Amorite," Goth and " Scyth," thus confirming my discoveries announced in the former work that the Sumerians, " Akkads," Amorites and Phoenicians were racially Aryans. Moreover, they use on their grave- amulet seals the same Sumerian sacred numeral script or " cup-mark " script, and couched in substantially the same formulas to the Sun-god as I have shown in my former work, were used by the Early Sumerians, Phoenicians, Amorites and Trojans, and by the Early Britons on their " cup- marked " tombs in Ancient Britain, and thus confirming my reading of this cup-mark script on the British monuments, and the Phoenician origin of the Britons. At the same time it is made clear that these early Aryan Sumero-Phoenicians who established and kept this colony on the Indus for about eight centuries, did not form a part of that great Aryan immigration which is now generally called " The Aryan Invasion of India." This latter event, with its permanent occupation and systematic civilization of the heart of India, the Ganges Valley or Hindustan, I find from a mass of new evidence, took place no earlier than the beginning of the seventh century B.C., and not by sea, but viii INDO-SUMERIAN SEALS DECIPHERED overland from Asia Minor and Syria-Phoenicia, through Persia and across the Lower Indus, by a remnant of the Hittite army and Aryan Syrio-Phcenician people seeking new settlements after their calamitous defeat by the Assyrian Sargon II at Carchemish in 718 B.C. The unique authenticity of the Indian Epic king-lists, as an independent source of Sumerian and Mesopotomian history — a discovery announced in my former work — is now strik- ingly confirmed by the evidence of these seals. The official Hittite origin of these king-lists, as the traditional lists of the Aryan kings from the Hittite archives back to the first Aryan dynasty in prehistoric times, and the circum- stances which led to their being embedded and preserved in the Indian Epics by the Hitto-Sumerian remnant of the Aryans on their exodus to India about 700 B.C. ; and my discovery that the ancient Aryan kings were Sumerians are set forth in my previous work. These Indian king-lists are now found to preserve systematically the ancestry and interrelations of the leading Mesopotamian kings and dynasties, with the original form of their names for the period of these seals, as also of antecedent and subsequent periods, which while in part disclosed by the Sumerian monuments, are still in great part unknown or misknown to Assyriologists, dependent as they are on isolated and frag- mentary records and late Semitic, Chaldean and alien king-lists. But the most fatal practical defect in the methods of Assyriologists disclosed by the comparison of these Indian king-list keys with the seals and with the Sumerian monu- ments and king-lists is that a great proportion of the names of Sumerian and Babylonian kings, gods and places, as " restored " by Assyriologists is largely and often wholly fictitious ; and thus has been misleading the public and students of comparative history and religion, by disguising the personalities and racial and linguistic affinities of the Sumerians. This inveterate defect in the restoration of the personal and place names of Sumerians by Assyriologist scholars is now seen to have arisen through the ambiguities of Sumerian PREFACE ix being an imperial or cosmopolitan composite language, which incorporated many foreign words borrowed from the diverse speech of the many subject non- Aryan races and tribes of the Sumerian empire. For the Sumerian scribes for the most part wrote their loan-words by the same picto- graphic word-sign as bore their Sumerian sound-values, from which it resulted that the selfsame word-sign in Sumerian syllabic writing usually possesses in the glossaries many different polyglottic (so-called " polyphonous ") values, often half a dozen or more, with no indication as to which was the pure Sumerian (i.e., Aryan) value. Hence Assyriol- ogists in " restoring " the spelling of a Sumerian proper name from its polyglottic syllabic signs into alphabetic spelling, and possessing no clue or notion whatever as to what the real phonetic form of that name was (except in a few instances where the glossaries give an unequivocal spelling), they are in the habit of selecting any one of these totally different phonetic values by mere guesswork, each scholar according to his own individual fancy. As a con- sequence the names thus coined at random by Assyriologists from the selfsame Sumerian word-signs are as bizarre as they are varied and so often fictitious. The result of finding such vagaries in the " restored " spelling of the selfsame Sumerian name by Assyriologists and the haphazard cause of the same, is to dissipate all faith in the form of proper names so " restored." For unless the Sumerian syllabic word-sign chances fortunately to possess but one phonetic value, and thus cannot be varied, which is seldom, no confidence whatever can be placed on the form and spelling of the names thus conjectur- ally restored. Now, however, this fatal defect in restoring Sumerian proper names of leading kings, priests and gods, is remedied to a great extent by our Indian Epic lists of the Early Aryan kings and dynasties. These place in our hands the traditional official lists of the names of those ancestral Aryan kings and dynasties, who we find were the Sumerian and " Akkad " kings of Early Mesopotamia, with their names in the phonetic form known to and preserved by their lineal b INDO-SUMERIAN SEALS DECIPHERED Aryan descendants. And these names for the period of these seals, as we shall see, are in substantial agreement with those inscribed on the seals and on their own monu- ments in Mesopotamia, although in most cases differing widely from those as hitherto conjecturally " restored " by Assyriologists. These Indian Epic king-lists are thus found to provide, as far as they go, a unique and the only known key to the restoration of the proper names and titles of the Sumerian and " Akkad " kings of Mesopotamia. A striking example of the invaluable practical use of these Indian Epic king-lists in recovering the true and original form of the names and titles of Sumerian kings is furnished by its preservation of the kings' names of the First Dynasty of Phoenicians, which founded the Indus Valley colony and some of whose seals are figured. This dynasty, hitherto con- sidered the first concrete dynasty of the Early Sumerians, and founded by the famous " Ur-Nina," was so great, that its galaxy of inscribed monuments, sculptures, seals and other works of art and craft, and massive buildings, temples and store-houses, unearthed at Telloh (" Lagash "), " the Pompeii of Early Mesopotamian antiquity," by M. de Sarzec during a quarter of a century, from 1877 to 1900, still forms the chief basis of our knowledge of the Early Sumerians. And it is actually taken as such by Professor Langdon in his recent historical sketch of the Sumerians in the Cambridge Ancient History, no further back than in 1923. Nevertheless, a few months later, in the same year, that Assyriologist, on finding a legendary list of Mesopotamian kings written by credulous priests of the petty and supposed alien dynasty at Isin, over a thousand years after the epoch of " Ur Nina," and purporting to give a complete list of the kings with their regnal years back to 241,200 years before the Flood ( ! ), accepts such a semi-fabulous list seriously, in preference to the sober testimony of the contemporary records of the historical Sumerian kings on their own monuments. And, merely because he could not find in this Isin list either the name " Ur Nina," or those of the rest of his dynasty, or indeed of nearly all the other historical Sumerian kings, including the famous and prolific emperor PREFACE xi Gudea, whose existing monuments make up nearly the sum- total of known Sumerian history, he throws over all these solidly-known historical kings with their monuments, and declares that they were mere impostors in calling themselves " kings " and dynasties — solely because he could not find them in his Isin list ! And in this extraordinary con- clusion Professor Sayce also has agreed. But other Assyriologists may now be reassured. That inference from the Isin list is merely " a mare's nest." Not only are " Ur Nina " and his dynasty all there, I find, but they are made even in this Isin list the first of all " human " Sumerian dynasties in Mesopotamia, as we shall find through the Indian king-lists, though their names and titles were not recognized by the professors, mainly through having " re- stored " the names mostly with the wrong phonetic values. And thus one at least of the several extra thousands of years which these scholars have generously added to the date of the Sumerians in Mesopotamia, before Ur Nina's epoch, on the strength of their reading of this list, has now got to be removed again. It is far from pleasant for me, indebted as I am for most of my knowledge of " Sumerian " to the labours of a great body of expert scholars, to be forced to expose these serious defects in their methods and theories which stand in the way of recovering true history. But no one should be more aware of the existence of these defects than themselves. And I trust that the means now offered for remedying them will receive that fair and impartial consideration, without which it is idle to hope for any advance in our knowledge of history. " Sumerian," of course, is not found written on any of these seals, for this is merely another of those misleading labels which Assyriologists have arbitrarily affixed to this Aryan race. It has never once been found employed by these people themselves, nor has the word ever been found in any " Sumerian " inscription or document, yet the public have been led, or rather misled, to believe that it was the genuine name of this pre-eminently civilized ancient Aryan people. Nor is the use by Assyriologists of the associated xii INDO-SUMERIAN SEALS DECIPHERED