WARRIOR-DURGA, RANI LAXMI BAI

OF JHANSI

V. SUNDARAM I.A.S

RANI LAKSHMIBAI OF JHANSI (1835-1858)

According to the Hindu Calendar, today, the 4^th of December 2010 (Saturday) is the 175^nd Jayanthi of Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi. To quote the inspiring words of Sri Rajiv K. Saxena:

“The story of Laxmi Bai, (born Nov.19, 1835) the Queen of Jhansi is unparalleled in the history of India. She was only 18 years old when her husband Gangadhar Rao, the King of Jhansi died. As the first born male child of Rani had died, the couple was childless. They adopted a child whom the English East India Company Government under Lord Dalhousie refused to accept as the legal heir to the throne of Jhansi. Instead the English offered her a pension of Rs. 60,000 per year and ordered her to leave the fort of Jhansi. Rani however refused and decided to fight for her rights. She raised a volunteer army where both men and women were recruited. In March 1858, English army laid siege to the fort of Jhansi and took Jhansi after fighting for two weeks. Rani escaped in the guise of a man with a few of her supporters, riding a horse with her son tied behind her back and a sword in her hand. She regrouped her forces in Kalpi, about 100 miles from Jhansi and advanced into Gwalior. Three weeks later on June 18, 1858 she was martyred by bullets of the English army in a combat battle. Super human courage, convictions and valour displayed by such a young girl in nineteenth century India who came forward to take on the English army in armed combat and to lay down her life fighting for her rights, became a source of inspiration for generations of Indians in their fight for independence.”

Lakshmi bai, The Rani (Queen) of Jhansi was one of the leading figures in the First War for Indian Independence and a radiant symbol of resistance to British rule in India. She has gone down in Indian history as a legendary figure, the firebrand who started the Indian armed revolution against British Colonialism and inaugurated the glorious struggle Indian independence.

Originally named Manikarnika at birth (nicknamed Manu), she was born on 19 November 1835 at Kashi (Varanasi) to a Maharashtrian brahmin family Moropant Tambe and Bhagirathibai Tambe. She lost her mother at the age of four. She was educated at home. Her father Moropant Tambe worked at the court of Peshwa at Bithur and then travelled to the court of Raja Bal Gangadhar Rao Newalkar, the Maharaja of Jhansi, when Manu was thirteen years old. She was married to Gangadhar Rao, the Raja of Jhansi, at the age of fourteen and was given the new name 'Lakshmi Bai'. Because of her father's influence at court, Rani Lakshmi Bai had more independence than most women, who were normally restricted to the zenana. She studied self-defense, horsemanship, archery, and even formed her own private army out of her female friends at court.

Rani Lakshmi Bai gave birth to a son in 1851. However this infant died when he was about four months old. After the death of their son, the Raja and Rani of Jhansi adopted Damodar Rao. However, it is said that her husband the Raja never recovered from his son's death, and the Raja of Jhansi died on 21 November 1853 of a broken heart. Since Anand Rao was an adopted son and not biologically related to the Raja, the East India Company, under Governor-General Lord Dalhousie, was able to impose the Doctrine of Lapse, rejecting Damodar Rao’s claim to the throne. Lord Dalhousie then annexed Jhansi, saying that the throne had become "lapsed" and thus put Jhansi under his “protection”. In March 1854, the Rani was given a pension of 60,000 rupees and ordered to leave the palace at the Jhansi fort.

"The Fort, Jhansi," a gelatin silver photo, c.1900; *"Mutiny Memorial, Jhansi"*

When the First War of Indian Independence broke out in 1857, Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi seized the opportunity to rise in rebellion against British colonial and imperial rule. When the British troops arrived under Sir Hugh Rose and laid siege to Jhansi on 23 March 1858, Rani Laxmibai with her faithful warriors decided not to surrender. The fighting continued for about two weeks. Shelling on Jhansi was very fierce. In the Jhansi army women were also carrying ammunition and were supplying food to the soldiers. The Rani rallied her troops around her and fought fiercely against the British. Meanwhile an army of 20,000, headed by the nationalist leader Tatya Tope, came to relieve Jhansi and to take Lakshmi Bai to freedom. However, the British, though numbering only 1,540 in the field were better trained and disciplined than the “raw recruits,” of Tatya Tope and these inexperienced soldiers turned back and fled shortly after the British began to attack on the 31st March 1858. Rani Lakshmi Bai’s forces could not hold out and three days later the British were able to breach the city walls and capture the city. Yet Lakshmi Bai escaped over the wall at night and fled from her city, surrounded by her guards, many of whom were from her female military corps.

Along with the young Damodar Rao, the Rani decamped to Kalpi, near Gwalior, along with her forces where she joined the other nationalist forces, including those of Tatya Tope. The combined nationalist forces of Rani and Tatya Tope occupied the strategic fort at Gwalior. The Rani donned warrior's clothes and rode into battle to save Gwalior Fort However on the second day of fighting in Kotah-Ki-Serai near Phool Bagh area of Gwalior against the English colonial forces (8th Hussars) led by Sir Hugh Rose on 17 June 1858, the Rani of Jhansi succumbed to her wounds. The British captured Gwalior three days later.

The Rani of Jhansi had taken care to see that her trusted bodyguards took planned advance action to cremate her dead body even before the English colonial troops had reached the scene of her death. Thus she prevented the English colonial troops from getting possession of her body and thus saw to it that Sir Hugh Rose, the English General and his colonial forces, were denied the political opportunity of defiling, desecrating and later hanging her body in public with the sole intention of humiliating her family and her beloved subjects.

Her father, Moropant Tambey, was captured and hanged a few days after the fall of Jhansi. Her adopted son, Damodar Rao, was given a pension of Rs 200 a month by the British Raj and cared for, although he never received his royal inheritance. This little boy who had been adopted as the future Ruler of Jhansi and who had escaped from the city with Rani Lakshmibai on horseback, lived on until 1936. He died without his title and with few possessions.

General Hugh Rose

In his Final Report of the Battle for Gwalior, General Hugh Rose (was known as Sir Hugh Rose) commented that the Rani “remarkable for her beauty, cleverness and perseverance and had been the most dangerous of all the rebel leaders”.

THE STORMING OF JHANSI

LIEUTENANT BONUS, SUPPORTED BY ONLY ONE MAN, MOUNTED A DOUBLE LADDER OF BAMBOO, AND FOR SOME TIME WAS HACKING, THRUSTING, AND PARRYING BLOWS, UNTIL A REBEL WITH HIS CLUBBED RIFLE HURLED HIM TO THE GROUND. ALTHOUGH HE HAD A REVOLVER IN HIS LEFT HAND HE WAS SO BUSILY ENGAGED THAT HE FORGOT TO USE IT.

In a prophetic statement in the 1878 book ‘The History of the Indian Mutiny’, Colonel Malleson said “...her countrymen will always believe that she was driven by ill-treatment into rebellion; that her cause was a righteous cause; ..... To them she will always be a heroine.”

Rani Lakshmi Bai became a national heroine and was seen as the epitome of female bravery in India. When Subhas Chandra Bose formed the Indian National Army and created the first female batallion, he named it after the Rani of Jhansi. THE RANI WAS MEMORIALIZED IN BRONZE STATUES AT BOTH JHANSI AND GWALIOR, BOTH OF WHICH PORTRAY HER ON HORSEBACK.

BRONZE STATUE OF RANI OF JHANSI AT JHANSI

Indian poetess Subhadra Kumari Chauhan wrote an inspiring great poem on Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi in the Veer Ras style. This is an emotionally charged poem describing the life of Rani Lakshmi Bai. The poem is one of the most recited and sung poems in Hindi literature. Today it is a part of the school curriculum in several parts of India and every child studying Hindi has to chant this inspiring poem.

POSTAGE STAMP OF SUBHADRA KUMARI CHAUHAN

I am quoting below a few stanzas from the great poem of Subhadra Kumari Chauhan.

I am giving below the English Transliteration of the above Hindi verses, together with their meanings in English.

16 English Transliteration of Verse 16 of the Poem

To bhi Rani maar kaat kar chalti bani sainya key paar,

kintu saamney naala aaya, tha woh sankat visham apaar,
ghoda adaa, naya ghoda tha, itney mein aa gaye avaar,
Rani ek, shatru bahuterey, honey lagey vaar-par-var


Ghayal hokar giri Sinhni, isey veer gati paani thi,
Bundeley Harbolon key munh hamney suni kahani thi,
Khoob ladi mardani woh to Jhansi wali Rani thi.

16    Meaning of Verse 16 of the Poem

Though Rani was deeply wounded,

still she was fighting and had managed to get through the British army,
But she got stuck because a sewerage canal was there on the other end
and she was in deep trouble,
Her horse got stuck there - the horse was untrained,
in the mean time, the British soldiers, riding on their horses reached there.
Rani was all alone while enemies were numerous
who were attacking her with their sword from all sides,
Rani, who was fighting like a lioness, succumbed to the wounds and fell down. She had to achieve a glorious death in war (Martyrdom).
From the mouths of the Bandelas and the Harbolas (Religious singers of Bandelkhand), we heard the tale of the courage of the Queen of Jhansi relating how gallantly she fought like a man against the British intruders: such was the Queen of Jhansi.

17 English Transliteration of Verse 17 of the Poem

Rani gayee sidhaar chita ab uski divya sawaari thi,
mila tej se tej, tej ki woh sachchi adhikaari thi,
abhi umr kul teis ki thi, manuj nahin avtaari thi,
humko jeevit karney aayee ban Swatantrata-naree thi,


dikha gayee path, sikha gayee humko jo seekh sikhani thi,
Bundeley Harbolon key munh hamney suni kahani thi,
Khoob ladi mardani woh to Jhansi wali Rani thi.


17 Meaning of Verse 17 of the Poem

Rani was martyred in the battlefield.
Her departed soul was then riding a divine vehicle,
moving towards heavens
the Light of her divine soul met with the divine light in the heavens,
she was the real heir of divinity,
She was only thirty years of age.
She was not a human; rather she was divine spirit (a holy being),
Who did come, in the gesture of a female freedom fighter,
to give us a respectable life of light and freedom ,
She showed us the path of freedom, and taught us the lesson of courage,
she taught us what we might have learned.
From the mouths of the Bandelas and the Harbolas (Religious singers of Bandelkhand),
we heard the tale of the courage of the Queen of Jhansi relating how gallantly she fought like a man against the British intruders: such was the Queen of Jhansi.

18     English Transliteration of Verse 18 of the Poem

Jao Rani yaad Rakhengey yeh krutagna Bharatwasi,

yeh tera balidaan jagavega Swatantrata avinasi,
hovey chup itihaas, lagey sachchai ko chahey phansi,
ho madmaati vijay, mitaa dey golon sey chahey Jhansi.

Tera Smarak tu hi hogi, tu khud amit nishaani thi,

Bundeley Harbolon key munh hamney suni kahani thi,
Khoob ladi mardani woh to Jhansi wali Rani thi.


18    Meaning of Verse 18 of the Poem

The people of India will remember this debt of yours (O! Rani Laxmaibai), may you be blessed, dear Rani,

Your this life sacrifice will awake an indestructible soul of freedom in the people,
History may be made silent or if truth is hanged or killed,
or if the drinkers become victorious or if they destroy jhansi with cannonballs,
You, by yourself be the memorial of Rani (queen of Jhansi)
because you had been an eternal token of courage.
From the mouths of the Bandelas and the Harbolas (Religious singers of Bandelkhand), we heard the tale of the courage of the Queen of Jhansi relating how gallantly she fought like a man against the British intruders: such was the Queen of Jhansi.

The above poem by Subhadra Kumari Chauhan on the Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi is a fitting tribute to a young and extremely brave queen, one of India's many heroines. I learnt the following bracing refrain from the above poem in Hindi when I was studying in the 5^th Standard in the Harcourt Butler Higher Secondary School in Shimla, 59 years ago in 1951.

Budele harbolon ke munh hamney suni kahani thi

Khoob ladi mardani woh to Jhansi wali rani thi

“From the mouths of the Bundelas and the Harbolas we have heard the story. Bravely she fought as a man, she was the Queen of Jhansi”

The brave saga of war waged by Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi against the English East India Company in 1858 brings to my mind the heroic battle fought by Queen Boadecia against the colonizing Romans in England in AD 60.

EQUESTRIAN STATUE OF QUEEN BOADICEA IN ENGLAND

Boadicea was born into a royal family around 26 A.D. She married Prasutagus, king of the Iceni, a tribe located in what is now Norfolk, England. Prasutagus was a client-king, meaning he ruled under the auspices of the Romans, who had probably put him on the throne in return for his assistance when they invaded England in 43 AD.

Upon Prasutagus's death around the year 59 AD, the kingdom passed into the hands of the Romans. The king had hoped the Romans would allow his two teenage daughters to keep half of his property, but instead the Romans took over completely. When Boadicea complained, she was publicly flogged and forced to watch as her daughters were raped.

Infuriated, Queen Boadicea became the leader of a violent uprising against Roman rule. But the Romans quickly put down the rebellion by defeating the undisciplined Britons in a ferocious battle (the exact site of which is uncertain). According to one account, Boadicea then killed herself with poison so she would not fall into Roman hands. Boadicea's name means "victorious," or Victoria. During the Victorian Age she came to be viewed as a heroic symbol of Britain.

Very much like the poem by Subhadra Kumari Chauhan on Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi, the English poet William Cowper (1731-1800) composed an Ode dedicated to Queen Boadicea. It was published in 1782. I am presenting below this Ode:

BOADICEA: AN ODE

WHEN the British warrior queen,

Bleeding from the Roman rods,

Sought, with an indignant mien,

Counsel of her country's gods,

Sage beneath a spreading oak

Sat the Druid, hoary chief;

Ev'ry burning word he spoke

Full of rage, and full of grief.

Princess! if our aged eyes

Weep upon thy matchless wrongs,

'Tis because resentment ties

All the terrors of our tongues.

"Rome shall perish—write that word

In the blood that she has spilt;

Perish, hopeless and abhorr'd,

Deep in ruin as in guilt.

Rome, for empire far renown'd,

Tramples on a thousand states;

Soon her pride shall kiss the ground—

Hark! the Gaul is at her gates!

Other Romans shall arise,

Heedless of a soldier's name;

Sounds, not arms, shall win the prize—

Harmony the path to fame.

Then the progeny that springs

From the forests of our land,

Arm'd with thunder, clad with wings,

Shall a wider world command.

Regions Cæsar never knew

Thy posterity shall sway,

Where his eagles never flew,

None invincible as they.

Such the bard's prophetic words,

Pregnant with celestial fire,

Bending, as he swept the chords

Of his sweet but awful lyre.

She, with all a monarch's pride,

Felt them in her bosom glow;

Rush'd to battle, fought, and died;

Dying, hurl'd them at the foe.

Ruffians, pitiless as proud,

Heav'n awards the vengeance due;

Empire is on us bestow'd,

Shame and ruin wait for you.

When William Cowper paid his tribute to Queen Boadicea in 1782, the Roman Empire had been extinct for nearly one thousand five hundred years. When Subhadra Kumari Chauhan participated in India’s Freedom Movement in the 1920’s, she composed her poem on Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi. The following verses inspired many freedom fighters in the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh, Bihar and the Central Provinces to brave the brutal Police lathi charges in the late 1920’s and early 1930’s.

सिंहासन हिल उठे राजवंशों ने भृकुटी तानी थी,

बूढ़े भारत में आई फिर से नयी जवानी थी,

गुमी हुई आज़ादी की कीमत सबने पहचानी थी,

दूर फिरंगी को करने की सबने मन में ठानी थी।

चमक उठी सन सत्तावन में, वह तलवार पुरानी थी,

बुंदेले हरबोलों के मुँह हमने सुनी कहानी थी,

खूब लड़ी मर्दानी वह तो झाँसी वाली रानी थी।।

The English translation of the above verses is given below:

The thrones shook and royalties scowled
Old India was re-invigorated with new youth
People realised the value of lost freedom
Everybody was determined to throw the foreigners out
The old sword glistened again in 1857
This story we heard from the mouths of Bundel bards
Like a man she fought, she was the Queen of Jhansi.

Just as the Roman Empire came to an end in 476 AD, the British Empire in India ended within 89 years of the martyrdom of Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi.

JAMES SHIRLEY

When I read about the unabashed arrogance of the Roman Emperors and the British Colonial Rulers in India between 1757 and 1947, I cannot help quoting the following timeless lines from the poem of James Shirley (1596-1666) titled ‘Death the Leveller’.

DEATH THE LEVELLER

The glories of our blood and state

Are shadows, not substantial things;

There is no armour against Fate;

Death lays his icy hand on kings:

Sceptre and Crown

Must tumble down,

And in the dust be equal made

With the poor crookèd scythe and spade.

Some men with swords may reap the field,

And plant fresh laurels where they kill:

But their strong nerves at last must yield;

They tame but one another still:

Early or late

They stoop to fate,

And must give up their murmuring breath

When they, pale captives, creep to death.

The garlands wither on your brow,

Then boast no more your mighty deeds!

Upon Death's purple altar now

See where the victor-victim bleeds.

Your heads must come

To the cold tomb:

Only the actions of the just

Smell sweet and blossom in their dust.

POSTSCRIPT

Letters of Rani of Jhansi 

After I had finished writing the above article on Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi, one of friends invited my attention to the following two historic letters written in Hindi by Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi.

The first letter was written in 1857 from Jhansi. I am presenting below the facsimile copy of this rare letter.

The second letter was written in 1858 from Kalpi. I am presenting below the facsimile copy of this letter.

(Reference: Source: "Bundelkhand Ka Vismrat vaibhav: Banpur" by Kailash Madavaiya, Pub. Manish Prakashan (author), 1978. The author has stated about one of these letters: " .. Even though the paper has become extremely fragile and in a few places the letters have dropped off, yet the descendants of Raja Mardan Singh of Banpur have trusted me to have it.")

I have also come across reference to a very rare letter in Persian sent by Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi to Lord Dalhousie on 21^st November 1853, 4 years before the First War of Indian Independence in 1857. It was on that day her husband Gangadhar Rao, the Raja of Jhansi had died.

Alastair Lawson has written an interesting story about how this letter was discovered recently in the BBC News. I am presenting below the full text of Alistair Lawson’s article which speaks for itself.

Indian heroine's letter unearthed
By Alastair Lawson
BBC News

A previously undiscovered letter written by one of India's best known female rebels against British colonial rule has been found by academics.



The letter was written by Lakshmibai, Rani of Jhansi, shortly before the Indian mutiny - or first war of independence - in 1857.

It has been found in London in the archives of the British Library.
The Rani of Jhansi has often been called the "Joan of Arc" of the Indian independence struggle.
Academics say the discovery of the letter is hugely significant, because so little historical evidence from the Rani of Jhansi's lifetime exists.

Fateful events.

"The letter is part of a collection of documents known as the Bowring Collection," said Deepika Ahlawat, research curator for the Victoria and Albert Museum's Maharaja exhibition currently being staged in London.

"The collection is named after Lewin Bentham Bowring, a civil servant working in India who gathered a remarkable collection of documents, photographs and ephemera relating to the maharajas."

The above letter is one of the few remaining artefacts from the Rani of Jhansi's life

The letter is written by the Rani of Jhansi to the Governor-General of the East India Company (EIC), Lord Dalhousie.



In it she describes the fateful events on the night her husband died.


"But under the Doctrine of Lapse then being imposed by the EIC, any Indian kingdom whose ruler died without an heir, or who was guilty of misrule - was subsumed into Company territory," explained Ms Ahlawat.


Fearing this doctrine, the Rani said that her husband adopted a suitable heir before his death by performing all the necessary rites for her adopted son, Damodar Rao Gangdhar, to be accepted as the next Raja of Jhansi. Lord Lord Dalhousie did not recognise the adoption and threatened to annex Jhansi, now in the state of Uttar Pradesh.

In 1857 the Rani joined the rebellion against the British and personally led her troops in battle. At one point she was captured by EIC troops but subsequently made a daring escape from a fort.



"All this made her the stuff of legend," said Ms Ahlawat. "According to some stories she died riding into battle against the British - another story says that she was shot while holding the ramparts of Gwalior Fort.


"Whatever the truth, the story of a female leader battling for her kingdom against the might of the EIC fired the nationalistic imagination when the contested history of 1857 came to be written.


"This letter written by an iconic talisman for the nationalist narrative in India, and her equestrian statue can be found in town squares all over the country."


The most important Equestrian Statues of Maharani Lakshmibai of Jhansi have been installed at Jhansi, Gwalior, Agra, Ghaziabad, Ahmedabad and Pune.

Equestrian statue of Jhansi Ki Rani (the Rani of Jhansi) in Chitralekha Park, Ahmedabad, India

The Rani of Jhansi, who died fighting the British in 1858; a modern statue in Jhansi

Swarna Jayanti Park, at Neeti Khand, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad.

Equestrian statue of Jhansi Ki Rani (the Rani of Jhansi) in Phul Bagh, Gwalior

 

Statue of Rani of Jhansi at Pune

 

STATUE OF RANI OF JHANSI AT AGRA

STAMP ISSUED ON RANI OF JHANSI

Issued in 1957 to mark the Centenary of Indian Mutiny

Conclusion: Lord Bacon wrote: “ Out of monuments, names, words, proverbs, traditions, private records and evidences, fragments of stories, passages of books and the like, we do save and recover somewhat from the deluge of time.” Animated by this spirit, I have presented the above story of Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi---the Mahishasuramardhini of India.

There is nothing that solidifies and strengthens a nation like reading the nation’s history, whether that history is recorded in books, or embodied in customs, institutions, and monuments. God is in the facts of history as truly as HE is in the march of the seasons, the revolutions of the planets, or the architecture of the worlds. All history is but a romance, unless it is studied as an example. The impartiality of history is not that of the mirror, which merely reflects objects but of the judge who sees, listens and decides.

DR S. KALYANARAMAN --- THE MODERN DAY JEAN-FRANÇOIS CHAMPOLLION-II

V.SUNDARAM I.A.S.

COVER PAGE OF HIS BOOK

Dr Kalyanaraman says that Indus Script Decipherment is to find a solution to aq problem in cryptography (called mlecchita vikalpa in Sanskrit), like G. K Chesterton’s detective Father Brown; to decipher or, decode the GLYPHS to understand meanings of the messages conveyed by Indus writing on nearly 5000 inscriptions discovered and unearthed so far.

Father Brown is a fictional character created by English novelist Chesterton, who stars in 52 short stories, stories which were later compiled into five books. Chesterton based his character Father Brown on a parish priest in Bradford called Father John O'Connor (1870–1952), who was involved in Chesterton's conversion to Catholicism in 1922. The relationship between them was recorded by O'Connor in his 1937 book Father Brown on Chesterton.

Father Brown was a short, stumpy Catholic priest, “formerly of Cobhole in Essex, and working in London,” with shapeless clothes, a large umbrella and an uncanny insight into human nature in general and human evil in particular. Father Brown made his first appearance in the story “The Blue Cross” and continued through the five volumes of short stories, often assisted by the reformed criminal Flambeau. He also appeared in a story “The Donnington Affair” that had a rather curious history. In the October 1914 issue of the obscure magazine The Premier, Sir Max Pemberton published the first part of the story, inviting a number of detective story writers, including Chesterton, to use their talents to solve the mystery of the murder described. Chesterton and Father Brown's solution followed in the November issue. The story was first reprinted in the Chesterton Review (Winter 1981, pp. 1–35) and in the book Thirteen Detectives. Unlike the more famous fictional detective Sherlock Holmes, Father Brown's methods tended to be intuitive rather than deductive.

DR. S. KALYANARAMAN

Dr Kalyanaraman’s approach to Indus Script Decipherment is intuitive, inductive and deductive. According to him cypher uses a code and a code key to transform information. Cipher meaning the numeral 0 derives from Arabic word sifr (meaning nothing). Artisan – traders of ancient times created the cipher (variant spelling of the word, cypher) and their trade associates who received the messages could securely decipher the text of coded messages by performing an inverse substitution using the code keys: rebus. The idea of obscuring the messages so that it could not be read even if it were intercepted resulted in “cryptography”, Greek term for “hidden or secret writing”. The result was the development of “codes” or secret languages, and “ciphers”, or scrambled messages. A “code” is essentially a secret language invented to conceal the meaning of a message. The simplest form of a “code” is the “jargon code”, in which a particular arbitrary phrase or Glyph is used to substitute for the real intended message. This is very much comparable to “army codes” used to send concealed messages. According to Dr Kalyanaraman Glyph of a device is shown in front of a one-horned heifer in over 1300 inscriptions. (Note: Sangada, ‘lathe, portable furnace’: rebus: battle; rebus: Jangadiyo ‘military guard who accompanies treasure into the Treasury’ [Gujarati])

In cryptography, Kerckhoffs' principle (also called Kerckhoffs' assumption, axiom or law) was stated by Auguste Kerckhoffs in the 19th century: a cryptosystem should be secure even if everything about the system, except the key, is public knowledge.

Kerckhoffs' principle was reformulated (perhaps independently) by Claude Shannon as “The enemy knows the system.” In that form, it is called Shannon's maxim. In contrast to "security through obscurity", it is widely embraced by cryptographers.

In 1883 Auguste Kerckhoffs Niewenhof (1835-1903) wrote two articles in a journal called La Cryptographie Militaire in which he laid down the following six design principles for military ciphers. Translated from French, they are as follows:

1. The system must be practically, if not mathematically, indecipherable;
2. It must not be required to be secret, and it must be able to fall into the hands of the enemy without inconvenience;

3. Its key must be communicable and retainable without the help of written notes, and changeable or modifiable at the will of the correspondents;

4. It must be applicable to telegraphic correspondence;

5. It must be portable, and its usage and function must not require the concourse of several people;

6. Finally, it is necessary, given the circumstances that command its application, that the system be easy to use, requiring neither mental strain nor the knowledge of a long series of rules to observe.

Some of the above principles are no longer relevant given the ability of computers to perform complex encryption, but his second axiom, now known as Kerckhoffs' Principle, is still critically important. Stated simply, the security of a cryptosystem should depend solely on the secrecy of the key. Another way of putting it is that a method of secretly coding and transmitting information should be secure even if everyone knows how it works.

Based on Kerckhoffs' Principle, Dr Kalyanaraman states: “Let us assume that Indus writing is a cryptographic system using a Code (or algorithm or Code Key) that converts glyphs into text messages. Such A system should be secure even if everything about the system, except for the key is public knowledge. The KEY for the Indus script Cipher is Rebus using the language of the LINGUISTIC AREA OF INDIA. The underlying language whose GLOSSES are used in the KEY is MLECCHA (MELUHHA)”.

What is strikingly original and significant about Dr Kalyanaraman’s approach to decipherment of Indus Script Cipher is that he makes no a priori assumptions about either the direction of borrowings of words from one language family into other language family to prove or disprove the relative antiquity of languages of India or the theories related to invasions or migrations or chronology of movements of people into or out of ancient India which yielded the majority of Indus script inscriptions. The keys used by him are:

a) The Rebus Method attested in Sumerian and Egyptian hieroglyphs and

b) The Principle of linguistic area well-attested in world-wide language studies consistent with the historically attested presents of speakers of Mundra, Dravidian, and Indo-Aryan language families in contact with one another, resulting in a linguistic area of India. THIS CONTACT RESULTED IN GLOSSES OF MLECCHA.

I fully endorse the magisterial declaration of Dr Kalyanaraman in this context: “The result of the decipherment of Indus Script is the clear identification of LANGUAGE X; it is MLECCHA, which included Glosses common to 2 or 3 language families of the linguistic area.

Hieroglyphs, “Sacred Carving are characters made by graphical figures (Glyphs) be it animals, or objects. In the linguistic area of India, a synonym is Kundau to turn on a lathe, to carve (Santali); Kudar, Kudari (Bengali); Kotti ‘carver’ (Malayalam). The Indus artisan who invented or deployed many skills and techniques had also become a writer or engraver using Indus script Cipher.

According to Dr Kalyanaraman, the 2 swastika seals exhibited in the British Museum represent the quintessence of the form and purpose of Indus script inscriptions. The landmark work by Thomas Wilson of the Library of Congress reviewed the History of this Glyph and concluded that it represented an object. This glyph has been decoded Rebus as representing Zinc Ore (Zinc Sulphide or Zinc Oxide) which, as an alloying mineral ore, added lustre and shine to the brass alloy giving it a golden appearance. This Glyph is inscribed on over 50 inscriptions, on seals, molded tablets, metal objects and copper plates. A Swastika seal also appears in Altyn-tepe close to the Caspian Sea in a long distance, Archaeologically attested, trading context. The Glyph appears in combination with other Glyphs such as elephant, tiger, drummer, endless-knot motif, reinforcing the hieroglyphic nature of the script and the Rebus reading method used for the decipherment of the Indus script. This Glyph had gained great significance as a sacred Glyph which, in the Indian tradition, is drawn on a site before constructing a fire-altar for performing yajna and on Temple walls. The importance assigned was equaled by the function Zinc ore performed in a casting process to lend gleam and shine to the brass alloy artifacts such as vessels, cruise or goblets.

Against this general background, Dr Kalyanaraman has described the method of Semantic Clustering to define Indian linguistic area as follows: “From the Glosses of the comparative Indian Lexicon of over 25 ancient languages of India, phonetic variants of photo-Indic Glosses or Glosses of the Indus language can be clearly identified with Semantic Clusters which are groups of words with similar vocabulary and similar ‘meanings’. These complement the Isogloss bundles which reinforce the Indian linguistic area and the language families in contact in the area and provide basic resources for studying history of language changes. ”

The proto-Indic Glosses relate to the underlying language of Indus script Glyphs which are composed and written in a variety of materials such as turbinella pyrum (chank), metallic objects such as ingots, daggers, gold pendants, seals, tablets, pottery and even on a massive Dholavira sign board on the citadel gateway.

Dr Kalyanaraman has rightly concluded: “Indus script conveyed messages of artisans --- lapidaries, mine-workers, masons, carpenters and smiths. The message related to the repertoire of techniques and materials used by the artisans constituting veritable professional calling cards of artisan guilds or advertisement bulletin boards (as in the case of Dholavira sign-board) of products and services of their enterprise. Evidence from ancient texts and Mesopotamian documents attest this proto-Indic language as MELUHHA (Mleccha). The artisans who invented lapidary and metallurgical techniques also invented a hieroglyphic writing system. ”

The use of Rebus Method to match sound values (words, morphemes or phonemes) to Glyphs was well-attested in contemporary civilizations of Egypt and Sumeria --- of periods prior to Second Millinnium BCE. Sumerian script was phonetized using the Rebus Method. Rebus is a graphemic expression of the phonetic shape of a word or a syllable. Rebus uses words pronounced alike (homophones) but with different meanings. What is most exciting in Rebus Method is a variation of the pun. In Rebus Method of writing, a pun is created by using (writing) pictures to evoke a sound that is identical or similar to a word or a word part (morpheme or phoneme).

The principle of Rebus Method is adopted in Sumerian, Egyptian Hieroglyphs and Indian Hieroglyphs as picture writing to denote sounds of an underlying language. What distinguishes the Egyptian Hieroglyphs from the Sumerian and Indus script Hieroglyphs? In the case of Egyptian Hieroglyphs, the underlying sounds of language are consonant clusters (syllables) but in the case of Sumerian and Indus script Hieroglyphs, the underlying sounds of language are mostly WORDS, rendering the Sumerian and Indus scripts LOGOGRAPHIC.

In the first Century before the Christian Era, when the Romans came to Egypt, they found the Nile Valley full of strange little pictures which seemed to have something to do with the history of the country. But the Romans were not interested in “anything foreign” and did not inquire into the origin of these queer figures which covered the walls of the temples and the walls of the palaces and endless reams of flat sheets made out of the papyrus reed. The last of the Egyptian priests who had understood the holy art of making such pictures had died several years before. Egypt deprived of its independence had become a store-house filled with important historical documents which no one could decipher and which were of no earthly use to man of beast.

Seventeen centuries later when the Rosetta Stone --- a slab of black basalt ---was discovered, it was very different from anything that had ever been discovered. It carried three inscriptions. One of these was in Greek. The Greek language was known. It was given to Jean-Francois Champollion (1790-1832) to state at the beginning of his search: “All that is necessary is to compare the Greek text with the Egyptian figures, and they will at once tell the secret.”

The plan sounded simple enough but it took more than 20 years to solve the riddle. In 1823, Champollion announced, after carefully comparing the Greek and Egyptian texts of the famous Rosetta Stone, that he had discovered the meaning of 14 little figures. He announced that the Egyptian writing system was a combination of phonetic and ideographic signs. He also came to the historic conclusion that the Egyptian Writing System was a combination of Hieroglyphic, Hieratic and Demotic writings.

The term ‘Hieroglyphic’ means literally “sacred carvings” and derives its name solely from the fact that in the latest times it was almost exclusively employed for the inscriptions graven on temple walls. It is now applied, however, to all Egyptian writing which is truly pictorial, ranging from the detailed, brightly coloured signs found adorning the tombs to the abbreviated specimens written with a reed-pen in papyri of religious content. ‘Hieroglyphic’ is, of course, the original variety of Egyptian writing out of which all the other kinds were evolved; sometimes it reads from top to bottom, sometimes from right to left, but sometimes also left to right, this being the form adopted in printed grammars; when the writing is from right to left the signs face towards the right.

The term ‘Hieratic’ was given to the style of writing employed by the priestly scribes for their religious books. This is a derivative of the abbreviated ‘Hieroglyphic’ referred to in the previous paragraph, but Egyptologists have extended the use of the term to several still more shortened varieties of script found in literary of business texts; ligatures, i.e., signs joined together, are frequent and in the most cursive sort all but the initial signs are apt to be reduced to mere strokes. For scholarly convenience ‘Hieratic’ is customarily transcribed into ‘Hieroglyphic’, though this practice becomes well-nigh impossible in extreme cursive specimens. The direction of writing is normally from right to left.

For the third kind of Egyptian writing, called Enchorial “native” on the Rosetta Stone by Egyptian scholars and Epistolographic “letter-writing” by Clement of Alexandria, modern scholars have retained Herodotus’s name Demotic “popular”. This ‘Demotic’ was evolved out of ‘Hieratic’ only about the time of the Ethiopian Dynasty from c700 BC. It presents many peculiarities and demands intensive specialist study. In the Ptolemaic and Roman Ages it was the ordinary writing of daily life and its range of employment is best described as non-religious.

Another factor that assisted in the evolution was the writing surface involved. ‘Hieroglyphic’ was essentially monumental, cut into stone with a chisel or painstakingly executed in ink or paint upon carefully prepared walls. ‘Hieratic’ was practically as old as ‘Hieroglyphic’, but was employed like ‘Demotic’, for writing on papyrus, on wooden boards covered with stucco wash, on potsherds or on fragments of limestone.

When Christianity began to supersede Pharaonic Paganism, a medium more easily intelligible became necessary for the translations of Biblical texts. That was the reason for the introduction of ‘Coptic’, which became the latest phase of the Egyptian language.

It was only through Champollion’s discovery in 1823 that an orderly and historically accurate picture of the Ancient Egyptian civilization became possible. Dr Kalyanaraman has very effectively used the Rebus Method of Champollion for effectively decoding the Indus Glyphs.

Besides he has also complemented and supplemented it with the Method of Areal Linguistics Aelucidated by Lyle Campbell. In a path-breaking Monograph on Areal Linguistics (2006), Lyle Campbell has stated that there is no meaningful distinction between Borrowing and Areal Lingusitics, or between what was inherited from what was diffused and that it would be necessary to provide a historical account of language changes.

Greatly influenced by the approach and insight of Areal Lingusitics of Lyle Campbell, Dr Kalyanaraman has presented his decryption of Indus script Cipher as an investigation of the facts of linguistic diffusion in the Archaeological context of finds exceeding 4000 inscriptions over the Sarasvati-Sindhu (Sarasvati-Indus) River Basins which is variously called a “Sprachbund, linguistic diffusion area, convergence area or areal type”.

In his landmark work of Indus Script Cipher, Dr Kalyanaraman has carefully analyzed and proved that Indian Linguistic Area (also called South Asian Linguistic Area) shared not just lone words, but also shared Phonological, Morphological, Syntactic Traits which are structural features of languages or language families of the Geographical Area defined by the Indus (also referred to Sarasvati-Sindhu) Civilization.

In the light of this detailed and acute analysis Dr Kalyanaraman comes to this original and brilliant conclusion: “Indian or South Asian Linguistic Area is composed of languages belonging to the Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Munda and Tibeto-Burman Language Families. … The sum of Borrowings of Structural Features (matched by shared Glosses) among Indo-Aryan, Dravidian and Munda Language Families is clearly established in cultural contact situations, and contingent historical events starting from the days of Sarasvati-Sindhu Civilization. One such historical, socio-cultural-economic or political economy event stands out: The continued use of Indus Script Glyphs on punch-marked coins over the entire Indian Linguistic Area.”

Dr Kalyanaraman endorses the approach of Mahadevan and Parpola on their use of the Rebus Method for decoding Glyphs of Indus Script but completely disagrees with them on the religious overtones they strenuously notice in the Indus inscriptions and Glyphs on the one hand and their attempt to assign grammatical morph and phonetic values to such Glyphs.

Dr Kalyanaraman has raised this question in this context. Since Parpola and Mahadevan assign the ‘Murukan’ value to different signs, who is right about the identification of a glyph to denote ‘Murukan’? Parpola or Mahadevan?

Avoiding such tortuous paths, Dr Kalyanaraman presents an alternative straight-forward Rebus Decoding of the select Glyphs by avoiding the diversionary paths of special pleading. Instead he uses Glosses of the Indian Linguistic Area which semantically cluster into repertoire --- products and skills of artisans and thus justifies the use of inscriptions directly in a trading context without suggesting occurrence of any names of people, places or deities. Thus, Dr Kalyanaraman’s decryption of Indus Script Cipher of Hieroglyphs of Indian Linguistic Area avoids the pitfalls of many past decipherment claims.

What I found most interesting is the reason given by Dr Kalyanaraman for choosing an inscribed object as the unit of analysis. To quote the words of Dr Kalyanaraman: “We have to be very cautious in interpreting the individual signs and individual pictorials; because, given the small size of the corpus, virtually ANY lexemic or phonemic or even artistic (cultural) value may be assigned and ANY language may be read into the inscriptions, if inscriptions they are, ‘readable’ in a language and do not merely represent artistic extravaganzas. Total objects presented in Purpola pictorial corpuses and Mahadevan concordance are a statistically small population, further fragmented due to the 400 to 500 signs (including variants and ligatures of basic signs) and over a 100 (including variants and pictorial ligatures yielding the so called ‘fabulous’ animals categories) signs. Thus, statistical stratification techniques assuming a normal distribution of population cannot provide statistically verifiable results. Hence, AN INSCRIBED OBJECT IS THE UNIT OF ANALYSIS.”

To sum up, this is the basic thesis of Dr Kalyanaraman:

1. There is no doubt that the Harappans were literate or had at least a literate social class. There are abundant examples of their script to verify this, but as yet not a single word can be rea

2. We know virtually nothing of the structure of the language nor do we even know to which linguistic family it belongs.

3. After surveying more than 100 claims of decipherments Gregory L. Possehi concluded that the writing system of Indus Valley Civilization remains undeciphered.

4. The Glyphs of Bos-Indicus and Fish are decoded and read Rebus as ‘Mleccha’ words denoting an artisan guild, in the context of recent discoveries of early iron-working in the civilization interaction area and many types of stone-beads made by lapidaries.

5. The continuity of the Sarasvati-Sindhu Civilization is the keynote which is affirmed by the postulation of an ‘Indian Linguistic Area’. (Kuiper 1948 and 1967, Emeneau 1956, Masica 1971, Southworth 2005)

6. 80 Years ago, Przyludski had noted non-Aryan loans in Indo-Aryan lamguages.

7. The language of the Indus writing system is hypothesized to be a proto-version of the Indian Linguistic Area or ‘Sprachbund’ (Indian Language Union).

8. One or more languages of India are likely to retain the glosses of the Indian language union. Glosses which are common to two or more of the language families --- Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Mundarika, Tibeto–Burman --- are likely to relate to the Indian language union.

9. The pictorial motifs used on inscriptions and script signs (most of which pictographic) are treated as logographs and read Rebus, using these glossed.

10. The sound value and substantive meaning value of the Homonymous Glosses relate to one semantic category: Metallurgy.

11. The decoding of the seals showing the Bos-Indicus points to the possibility that the inventors of early Metallurgy were also inventors of the Indus writing system.

12. Fifty (50) epigraphs of the civilization showing Bos Taurus Indicus which has been decoded as a Hieroglyph denoting in Mleccha a metal-smithy guild. This reference to a community through a glyph is indicative of the early guild working in the civilization.

Based on his analysis going through the Rebus path, Dr Kalyanaraman makes us understand that a language is only in part an individual instrument. It is in the main a community instrument used for community purposes. As such, a language tends to launch out on a career of its own, to which individuals --- traders, artisans, workers, and men belonging to different occupational groups --- contribute very much as the coral instinct contributes to the growth of a coral reef or island across centuries and vast expanses of Time.

Language has been the master tool which man who in his endless adventure after knowledge and power has shaped for himself, and which in its turn, has shaped the human mind as we know it. It has continuously extended and conserved the store of knowledge upon which mankind has drawn. It has furnished the starting point of all our science. It has been the instrument of social cohesion and of moral law, and through it human society has developed and found itself. Language, indeed, has been the soul of Mankind. In short, language is the house of BEING.

All of us are sensitive to the beauty of language. It will not be too much to state that some aspects of this beauty are shared by linguistic sciences. But one may ask the question as to the extent to which the quest for beauty is an aim in the pursuit of linguistic science. My answer to this question is this. A linguistic scientist like Dr Kalyanaraman does not study language because it is useful to do so. He studies it because he takes pleasure in it; and he takes pleasure in it because it is beautiful. If language were not beautiful, it would not be worth knowing and life would not be worth living. I mean, the intimate beauty which comes from the harmonious order of its parts and which a pure intelligence can grasp. It is because simplicity and vastness are both beautiful that a linguistic scientist like Dr Kalyanaraman seeks by preference simple facts and vast facts. He seems to be taking delight, now in following the giant courses of the stars of multiple cultures and civilizations across centuries, now in scrutinizing with a microscope that prodigious smallness which is also a vastness, and, now in seeking multiple ages through the traces of the past that attracts him because of its remoteness.

To Conclude, Dr Kalyanaraman has produced a pioneering work which enables us to find our footsteps for deciphering the intractable Indus script. Max Muller, the Philologist declared, “Language is the Rubicon that divides Man from beast.” The boundary between the human and animal --- between the most primitive savage and the highest ape --- is the language line. The birth of language is the dawn of humanity, in our Beginning was the Word. Ludwig Wittgenstein, the philosopher, wrote: “The limits of my language are the limits of my mind. All I know is what I have words for.” Without the Word we are imprisoned; possessing the word we are set free. The individual and community importance for language was brought out by William Gibson in his play ‘The Miracle Worker’ where he has described what happened when Anne Sullivan (Helen Keller’s first teacher) first met Helen’s mother:

Mrs Keller: What will you try to teach Helen first?
Anne Sullivan: First, last, and in between, language.
Mrs Keller: Language?
Anne Sullivan: LANGUAGE IS TO THE MIND MORE THAN LIGHT IS TO THE EYE.

The miracle that Anne Sullivan worked was to give Hellen Keller language for only language could transform a small animal that looked like a child, a Kuntu, into a human being, a Muntu. Day after day, Month after month, Anne Sullivan spelled words into Helen’s hands. Finally, when Helen was 7 years old and working with her teacher in the presence of water, she spoke her first word. Years later, Helen Keller described that moment in ‘The Story Of My Life’ (1902):

“Somehow the mystery of language was revealed to me. I knew then that ‘w-a-t-e-r’ meant that wonderful cool something that was flowing over my hand. That living word awakened my soul, gave it light, hope, joy, set it free. … I left the well-house eager to learn. Everything had a name and each name gave it a new thought.”

Dr Kalyanaraman, who has the full Blessings and Benedictions of Goddess Sarasvati, has achieved the same effect in respect of his readers’ vis-à-vis the Indus Script Cipher what Anne Sullivan achieved in respect of Hellen Keller. I felt the same way after reading every page of Dr Kalyanaraman’s magnificent work ‘INDUS SCRIPT CIPHER’. The measure of the success of a new scientific theory is, in fact, a measure of its aesthetic value, since it is a measure of the extent to which it has introduced harmony in what was before chaos. Dr Kalyanaraman has introduced such a harmony into the darkest recesses relating to the decipherment of the Indus script. This is not the End. This is not even a Beginning of the End. This is only the End of the Beginning.

Let me pay my tribute to Dr Kalyanaraman in the immortal words of John Keats:

“Beauty is Truth

Truth Beauty - That is all

Ye Know on Earth,

And all ye need to know”