________________
SEPTEMBER, 1906.] THE ORIGIN OF THE DEVANAGARI ALPHABET.
A THEORY OF THE ORIGIN OF THE DEVANAGARI ALPHABET. BY B. SHAMASASTRY, B.A.
253
CHAPTER I.
IT has been a matter of considerable dispute whether the origin of the Devanagari Alphabet is indigenous or foreign. The majority of Oriental scholars have held the latter view and have based their theories on resemblances of the Devanâgarî to some of the foreign alphabets. Those letters of the Devanagarî, which withstood this test, have been supposed to have undergone modifications, due either to cursive hands or to intentional changes made by the borrowers. Prof. Bühler was of opinion that the alphabet imported into India was made to assume native Indian forms and disguised so cleverly that one would swear it was a native invention.1
An independent and indigenous origin for the Indian Alphabet has, however, been suggested by General Cunningham, Prof. Dowson, and others; but since their suggestion was not so much based on positive historical evidences as on the futility of the attempts of others to derive the alphabet from any foreign source, it found no supporters. That the above is a correct presentation of the case with regard to the theories and the evidence, on which the theories accounting for the origin of the Devanagari are based, will be clear from the following extract from Issac Taylor's The Alphabet :
"Three theories have been propounded: Prinsep, followed by Otfried Miller, was inclined to attribute the peculiarities of the Asoka Alphabet to Greek influences, an opinion upheld by M. Senart and M. Joseph Halévy. Dr. Wilson's guess was that Asoka's Buddhists derived their letters from Greek or Phoenician models.
"A Semitic origin had, however, been already suggested by Sir William Jones in 1806 and supported by Kopp in 1821. In 1834 Lepsius published his adhesion to this opinion, which was afterwards espoused by Weber, who was the first to bring forward in its favour arguments of real cogency. Benfey, Pott, Westergaard, Bühler, Max Müller, Friedrich Müller, Sayce, Whitney, and Lenormant have given a more or less hesitating adhesion to the Semitic hypothesis, but without adding any arguments of importance to those adduced by Weber. The most recent advocates on this side are Dr. Deeke, who has marred what might have proved a valuable contribution to the controversy by the introduction of the untenable theory of an ultimate derivation from the Assyrian Cuneiform, though the South Semitic Alphabet which may, he thinks, have been used in Persia or rather in Babylonia.
"A third theory, that of an indigenous, origin, is upheld by specialists of nearly equal authority. This solution was first suggested by Lassen. He was followed by Mr. Edward Thomas, who decisively rejects every Semitic source, attributing the invention to the Dravidian races of Southern India. General Cunningham has propounded an elaborate scheme as to the mode in which, as he considers, the Aśoka Alphabet may have originated out of a primitive Indian picture writing. The final contribution to the argument is from the pen of Prof. Dowson, whose opinions are entitled to great consideration. His conclusion is that the peculiarities of the Indian Alphabet demonstrate its independence of all foreign origin' and that 'it may be confidently urged that all probabilities and inferences are in favour of an independent invention.'
1 Ante, Vol. XI., p. 270.
