The Indus Valley script is best described by scholars today as what?

• A. A deciphered script similar to cuneiform
• B. An alphabetic system like Greek
• C. A pictographic code that mirrors Arabic script
• D. Largely undeciphered

Answer: (D)

The main idea here is that the signs of the Indus Valley script have not been read or understood in a reliable way. Inscriptions appear on seals, pottery, and small artifacts from sites like Harappa and Mohenjo-daro, dating to roughly 2600–1900 BCE, but there is no agreed translation or pronunciation. There’s no bilingual text to compare with a known language, and the signs’ meanings and structure remain uncertain. Because of that lack of a consensus reading, scholars describe the script as largely undeciphered today.

That’s why the other possibilities don’t fit. It isn’t regarded as a deciphered script akin to cuneiform, since there’s no accepted translation. It isn’t considered an alphabet like Greek, which uses a set of letters to spell words phonetically. It isn’t described as a pictographic code mirroring Arabic script, because there’s no credible evidence linking the Indus signs to Arabic writing. The current consensus emphasizes that we can study the signs and patterns, but we cannot read the language they encode.