The Indus Script: Texts, Concordance and Tables c9.s8.t2.7

c9.s8.t2.7

It is clearly undesirable to lose control over the sitewise distribution of the objects; a purely typological arrangement mixing objects from all sites would be inadvisable. The site from which the object comes has to be a primary parameter of the classification. Now that seals and inscriptions coming from one and the same site will be distributed in several volumes, a flexible new numbering system is required which will both allow additions at will and make it easy to place the object in its proper context.⁷¹ The *Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions* employs a separate consecutive numbering for each site, prefixed by a letter code which is more easily remembered than a numerical code. The major sites have a short, one-letter code. These sites are, moreover, arranged in each volume according to the total number of seals and inscriptions found at them, in the descending order. The sites which are "smaller" (in respect to the number of seals and inscriptions found at them) have a two-, three- or four-lettered code corresponding to their standard archaeological abbreviations and they are arranged in alphabetical order for easy reference. (See the table of contents.) The letter prefix for the site is followed by a dash and the number of the object assigned to it by its place within the classification sequence. Thus the objects from Mohenjo-daro in this first volume are numbered M-1 to M-620, and they are followed by the objects from Harappa starting with H-1. The objects from Mohenjo-daro in the second volume will start with M-621. Any number of additions can be made.