Unicorn Impression 10 found as a part of some container at Gola DhoroUnicorn seal (H2000-4500/10007-01) found on the floor of Room 603 in Trench 43Low fired sealing in terra cotta of a unicorn seal from the Trench 54 area (H2000-4453/2174-192). This type of clay sealing was used to seal bundles of goods for transport.Harappan Unicorn Seal from BijnorUnicorn Seal From Gola DhoroUnicorn seal from Trench 37, which lies to the east of the “Granary.” This type of seal comes from levels dating to Harappa Phase Period 3B. Similar seals were found near the “granary” in 1997.Intaglio seal (H97-3433/7617-01) with script and unicorn motif found in Trench 41NE in 1997. This seal dates to approximately 2200 BCE, at the transition between Harappa Periods 3B and 3C.Unicorn seal (H2000-4500/10007-01) after conservation. Note the deeply chiseled engraving of the script similar to that found particularly on Period 3C rectangular seals.Large unicorn seal (H99-4064/8796-01) found on the floor of Room 591 in Trench 43, dating to late Period 3C. This is one of the largest seals found from any Indus site.This seal from Mohenjo-daro measures 29 mm (1.14) inches on each side and is made of fired steatite. Steatite is an easily carved soft stone that becomes hard after firing. On the top are four “pictographs” of an as yet undeciphered Indus script, one of the very first writing systems in history.Unicorn seal from Trench 37, which lies to the east of the “Granary.” This type of seal comes from levels dating to Harappa Phase Period 3B. Similar seals were found near the “granary” in 1997.ASI Number M633-aA square steatite unicorn seal with a unique inscription was found in the street debris on the inside of the city wall. The two sets of signs on the right hand side of the seal would appear in reverse, i.e. be on the left, when it was pressed into clay. Harappan Period, c. 2300 BC.A steatite unicorn seal from Harappa with Indus script. This seal was found in the central area of Mound E and dates to Period 3B or early 3C, around 2450-2200 BCE. When pressed into clay the impression will be reversed. Since the Indus script may have been read from right to left, the last two signs visible at the top right-hand edge of the seal would, in fact, be the last two signs of the inscription. They thus would be positioned in the same order as seen on the Early Harappan sherd (42) that dates up to four hundred years earlier. (More unicorn seals at 55, 64.)An animal with three heads featuring an antelope, a bull and a unicorn. All three animal have also been individually featured. Mohenjo-daro, DK 7734
Islamabad Museum, NMP 50.289, Mackay 1938: pl. XCVI, 494Large square unicorn seal with perforated boss on the back to hold the stamp, Mohenjo-daro, HR 743, National Museum, Karachi, NMP 50.192, Marshall 1931: pl. CIII, 8Back Side of the Large square unicorn seal with perforated boss on the back to hold the stamp, Mohenjo-daro, HR 743, National Museum, Karachi, NMP 50.192, Marshall 1931: pl. CIII, 8Unicorn Figure Seal From Indus Valley (Sindhu-Saraswati)Unicorn seal (H2000-4500/10007-01) after conservation. Note the deeply chiseled engraving of the script similar to that found particularly on Period 3C rectangular seals.[Original text] “The animal most often represented on the seals is the apparently single-horned beast . . .. There is a possibility, I think, that the artist intended to represent one horn behind the other. In other animals, however, the two horns are shown quite distinctly. In some respects the body of this beast, which is always a male, resembles that of an antelope of heavy build, such as the eland or oryx, and in others that of an ox. The long tufted tail may belong to either class. The horn is sometimes smooth . . . sometimes it has transverse ridges. In the latter case, the possibility of the creature being an ox is ruled out. The long pointed ears are also characteristic of the antelope. Perhaps we have here a fabulous animal which is a composite of the ox and antelope. And yet to the casual eye there is nothing fantastic about it, as about some of the other animals represented on seals; nor does it in any way resemble the unicorn of heraldry, which is made up of different parts of a number of animals, though it must be noted that the traditional unicorn was supposed to have originated in India.” [Marshall, Vol. II., p. 382]This unicorn seal was also discovered during the late 1927-31 excavations at Mohenjo-daro. One theory holds that the bull actually has two horns, but that these have been stylized to one because of the complexity of depicting three dimensions. However the manufacturing and design process behind seals was so sophisticated that the depiction of three dimensions might not necessarily have been a problem.[Original text, 1931] It should, however, be borne in mind that these animals may perhaps represent the dieties of provinces, in exactly the same way as do the ‘nome’ animals of Egypt, all of which are commonly shown on standards very similar to the ones carried by the men in the Mohenjo-daro impressions. There is, however, a serious argument against this latter theory. The unicorn type of animal occurs just as frequently on the seals from Harappa, 400 miles away, as at Mohenjo-daro, whcih would hardly be the case if the animal was the symbol of a province. [Marshall, Vol. II, p. 385]These two sealings are labelled 1917-1920 in the ASI archives. They come from Punjab volume 26, earlier than the full 1921 excavation images which were in volumes 27 and 28. Why 1917? In the absence of more information it is hard to say much except that it was before 1921, and likely 1917-20 as the caption suggests.
But Sahni did not refer to it in his 1917 report, which one would have expected if it had been found prior to the commencement of excavations in January 1921.
Maybe they were supplied to the archaeological department before 1921, maybe even in 1917 but not catalogued? We are investigating and will post any updates if they become available.
“These photographs are of impressions of seals. They are not actual sealings of the Harappa Phase. The location of the original seals and the date of their discovery is not known.”
– Jonathan Mark Kenoyer, 2021.
Slide Year: 1921: Sahni’s First Finds at Harappa ASI Number: none Punjab Volume: 26 Silver Plate: I.103This silver seal with a unicorn motif is one of two found at Mohenjo-daro.
Mackay 1938: Vol. 1, p. 348, Vol. 2, Pl. XC,1; XCVI, 520.Harappan Pendant 8
“Perhaps the most intriguing aspects of the ancient Indus culture are the religion and politics, which appear to have been closely intertwined. The mythical unicorn commonly illustrated on seals may have been the symbol of a merchant clan as well as an object of veneration (fig 1.6 [above],” writes Dr. Kenoyer (Ancient Cities, p. 18).
He elaborates about this medallion (p. 188, another view)
“Pendant or medallion pictures the unicorn combined with many sacred symbols of the Indus religion. The body of the figure has a kidney or womb-shaped symbol in its belly, the same motif is elaborated to form the frame for the pendant, which is also a common design for shell inlay (see cat. no. 110). Two leaf shapes of the sacred fig or pipal tree are depicted at the animal’s shoulder and rump. A ritual offering stand is placed in front of the image. The deeply incised frame and the symbols on the unicorn would have been set with inlay.”
Material: Unfired tan steatite
Dimensions: 6.3 x 6.8 cm
Mohenjo-daro, DK 8063
National Museum, Karachi, 50.125
Mackay 1938, 546, pl. CXL, 59
ASI Number: DK 8063An additional six copies of these tablets, again all with the same inscriptions, were found elsewhere in the debris outside of perimeter wall [250] including two near the group of 16 and two in debris between the perimeter and curtain walls. Here all 22 tablets are displayed together with a unicorn intaglio seal from the Period 3B street inside the perimeter wall, which has two of the same signs as those found on the tablets. (See also 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60).Quoting from R.H. Meadow and J.M. Kenoyer’s article in South Asian Archaeology 1997 (Rome, 2001): “It is tempting to think that the evident loss of utility and subsequent discard of the tablets is related to the “death” of the seal. Seals are almost always found in trash or street deposits (and never yet in a grave) indicating that they were either lost or intentionally discarded, the latter seeming the more likely in most instances. The end of the utility of a seal must relate to some life event of its owner, whether change of status, or death, or the passing of an amount of time during which the seal was considered current. A related consideration is that apparently neither seals nor tablets could be used by just anyone or for any length of time because otherwise they would not have fallen out of circulation. Thus the use of seals — and of tablets — was possible only if they were known to be current. Once they were no longer current, they were discarded. This would help explain why a group of 16 (or 18) tablets with the same inscriptions, kept together perhaps in a cloth or leather pouch, could have been deposited with other trash outside of the perimeter wall of Mound E.”
Disclaimer
All the images on this page have been sourced from Harappa.com and other websites which are properly referenced.
As the study of the Harappan/Indus Valley/Sindhu Saraswati Civilization still lies in a phase where writings have not been deciphered yet, all the guesswork and estimates are based on circumstantial evidence. Reader discretion is advised.
Dhirendra Das
Dhirendra Das is a historian, journalist, and researcher with a passion for uncovering the past. A history enthusiast since 2007, he combines his expertise in journalism, an MBA, and a B.Tech background to present well-researched, engaging narratives. With a published paper on ancient history, Dhirendra explores civilizations, pivotal events, and historical mysteries with a commitment to accuracy and depth. As the founder of history.org.in, he aims to make history accessible, insightful, and relevant for modern audiences.
![[Original text] "The animal most often represented on the seals is the apparently single-horned beast . . .. There is a possibility, I think, that the artist intended to represent one horn behind the other. In other animals, however, the two horns are shown quite distinctly. In some respects the body of this beast, which is always a male, resembles that of an antelope of heavy build, such as the eland or oryx, and in others that of an ox. The long tufted tail may belong to either class. The horn is sometimes smooth . . . sometimes it has transverse ridges. In the latter case, the possibility of the creature being an ox is ruled out. The long pointed ears are also characteristic of the antelope. Perhaps we have here a fabulous animal which is a composite of the ox and antelope. And yet to the casual eye there is nothing fantastic about it, as about some of the other animals represented on seals; nor does it in any way resemble the unicorn of heraldry, which is made up of different parts of a number of animals, though it must be noted that the traditional unicorn was supposed to have originated in India." [Marshall, Vol. II., p. 382]](https://history.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/image-21.png)
![[Original text, 1931] It should, however, be borne in mind that these animals may perhaps represent the dieties of provinces, in exactly the same way as do the 'nome' animals of Egypt, all of which are commonly shown on standards very similar to the ones carried by the men in the Mohenjo-daro impressions. There is, however, a serious argument against this latter theory. The unicorn type of animal occurs just as frequently on the seals from Harappa, 400 miles away, as at Mohenjo-daro, whcih would hardly be the case if the animal was the symbol of a province. [Marshall, Vol. II, p. 385]](https://history.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/image-24.png)
![Harappan Pendant 8
"Perhaps the most intriguing aspects of the ancient Indus culture are the religion and politics, which appear to have been closely intertwined. The mythical unicorn commonly illustrated on seals may have been the symbol of a merchant clan as well as an object of veneration (fig 1.6 [above]," writes Dr. Kenoyer (Ancient Cities, p. 18).
He elaborates about this medallion (p. 188, another view)
"Pendant or medallion pictures the unicorn combined with many sacred symbols of the Indus religion. The body of the figure has a kidney or womb-shaped symbol in its belly, the same motif is elaborated to form the frame for the pendant, which is also a common design for shell inlay (see cat. no. 110). Two leaf shapes of the sacred fig or pipal tree are depicted at the animal's shoulder and rump. A ritual offering stand is placed in front of the image. The deeply incised frame and the symbols on the unicorn would have been set with inlay."
Material: Unfired tan steatite
Dimensions: 6.3 x 6.8 cm
Mohenjo-daro, DK 8063
National Museum, Karachi, 50.125
Mackay 1938, 546, pl. CXL, 59
ASI Number: DK 8063](https://history.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/image-28.png)
![An additional six copies of these tablets, again all with the same inscriptions, were found elsewhere in the debris outside of perimeter wall [250] including two near the group of 16 and two in debris between the perimeter and curtain walls. Here all 22 tablets are displayed together with a unicorn intaglio seal from the Period 3B street inside the perimeter wall, which has two of the same signs as those found on the tablets. (See also 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60).Quoting from R.H. Meadow and J.M. Kenoyer's article in South Asian Archaeology 1997 (Rome, 2001): "It is tempting to think that the evident loss of utility and subsequent discard of the tablets is related to the “death” of the seal. Seals are almost always found in trash or street deposits (and never yet in a grave) indicating that they were either lost or intentionally discarded, the latter seeming the more likely in most instances. The end of the utility of a seal must relate to some life event of its owner, whether change of status, or death, or the passing of an amount of time during which the seal was considered current. A related consideration is that apparently neither seals nor tablets could be used by just anyone or for any length of time because otherwise they would not have fallen out of circulation. Thus the use of seals -- and of tablets -- was possible only if they were known to be current. Once they were no longer current, they were discarded. This would help explain why a group of 16 (or 18) tablets with the same inscriptions, kept together perhaps in a cloth or leather pouch, could have been deposited with other trash outside of the perimeter wall of Mound E."](https://history.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/image-19.png)
