Book Title: Indian Antiquary Vol 48
Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Previous | Next

Page 66
________________ 62 THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY MAY, 1919 in any part of the old world without full note of their long tale in the prehistoric dawn. These digressions apart, which were entered into merely to show that probably the laudable attempts of the great Cunningham to pre-suppose and evolve a fore-running Hieroglyph or Pictograph from the existing Brâhini type were but love's labours lost, I pass on to the script in question which was deciphered as "Maata." We have already referred to the Acrophonic value of the artifact and now we would point out that " Maata " as an euphonym is very common amongst Egyptian sovereigns (witness name "Ra-maat" of queen Hatashu or Hatshepshet). "The word mät, mat, mat, meaning eye' also runs through several of the Mon-Annam languages to which the Munda of Chota Nagpur bears remarkable affinities, e.g., Mon, mat; Stieng, mat : Bahnar, mat; Annam, mat; Khasi, Khmat (dialectic māt); ( vide Gurdon, p. 206). Before passing on to other questions it is well to consider the probability of the knowledge of writing in Neolithic India. Bruce Foote in his masterly second volume on the Prehistorio and Proto-historic Antiquities (Notes on the Ages, etc., p. 15) points out: "That the Indian people of Paläolithic times did occasionally make drawings and engravements for special purposes, seem, however, more than probable, because implements suitable for the preparation of such drawings have been found, notably the 'chert-burin' from Jubbulpur resembling one from Les Eyzies." Thus what Masd'Azil has established in Europe, the Jubbulpur "chert-burin' would lead us to in far-off India, namely, that alpha betiform signs (Alphabetarlige Zeichen) first arose in the transitional period between the Palæolithic and the Neolithic ages. Moreover, graffiti etchings remarkably resembling those from the "Rein-deer" period of prehistoric Europe have been reported from Neolithic Kapgallu hills of the Bellary District. Similarly Mr, c. W. Anderson has reported of the Rock-paintings of Singapore in the Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society for September 1918, of which plate 8, depicting the folded palm of a hand, makes a near approach to the shape of our piece of Hæmatite. Now not much doubt should remain as to the antiquity of our finds, which was collected by competent savants of the Geological Survey and catalogued as a genuine artifact of Neolithic India by the unassa ilable Indian geological and anthropological knowledge of Mr. Coggin Brown, as these Egyptian similarities unmistakably point to the same mysterious prehistoric connections to whicn I have referred already. At least the mere fact that Indian archæology, which takes us back to Naks-i-Rustam and Behistun tablets of the sixth century B.c., has not a word to say on this shows how far anterior to that period would have been the time of the contact of the Egyptian and Indian cultures as there can be proved to have been some, by these and subsequent evidence. Here we have two Neoliths, one of which we have read with a key supplied by prehistoric Egypt and the other harking back to some characteristics which are unmistakably Egyptian, so can we not say that they belong to a time when either prehistoric India was being influenced by predynastic Egypt (for the key which we have usert belongs to prehieroglyphic and proto-hieratic period) or vice versa, or a common culture was swaying both the lands? Though the prehistoric data from India have not yet been exhausted, five catalogues have already enabled me sufficiently to enter into the same interesting problem in a second paper on the vestiges of a prehistoric race of India and a third paper on the chronology of the Indian early Iron Age and it would be seen that the conclusions. which prehistoric palæography clearly hints at, would be rendered highly probable by a comparative study of some ancient skulls and would almost settle into a valid scientific induction by the tests of prehistoric archæology and metallurgy of India

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458