Indian Antiquary Vol 62

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 71

MARCH, 1933 ]
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
59
3. The inscription was discovered by an educated Sadhu, Svámi JnAnAnanda. Mr. Lochan Prosad Pandey, founder and secretary of the Mahakosala Sooiety of the Central Provinces, rendered valuable service by bringing it to our notice. At first I obtained an eye-copy of the letters, and since then scientific copies have been procured for the Patna Museum. I have to thank Mr. Senapati, Deputy Commissioner of Sambalpur, for the material help rendered to us in obtaining these copies.
4. An examination of the letters, which at first sight give the impression of having Brahmi forms, showed that the writing was a mixture of Brahmi forms and a developed type of the Mohenjodaro script. As the announcement of the discovery of the inscription and my opinion thereon has led to numerous inquiries, I hasten to publish the record for study by scholars, along with a few observations of my own, as set out below.
Conelusions. 5. The inscription is a writing this cannot be doubted. My reasons for this conclusion are :-The symbols were first carefully painted and then inscribed after the fashion of inscriptions, i (ii) the writing is in regular lines (the lines are not always straight, owing partly to the very rough surface on which they are inscribed); (iii) the symbols have set forms, which disclose writing habits' in the phraseology of handwriting experts. The hand which first painted the letters was used to writing with a pen : this is evident from Plate 6.
6. The system knows the bindu, and also, probably, the visarga. Some letters have dots placed below them, while in some cases dots seem to give a discriminative value to the letters, as in Semitic writing.
7. The right-hand corner top line on Plate 8, where the same symbol is repeated more than once, may point to the employment of numerals.
8. There is an animal figure which is probably not a part of the writing, but a symbol. There is, however, one symbol like a bellows placed side-ways, which recurs.
9. The writing seems to me to be from right to left (see, particularly, Plate 6).
10. It is evident that some of the letters disclose accentuation. Repetition of the same letter twice probably suggests consonantal duplication or conjuncts. 11. The writing seems to have reached the syllabary (alphabetic) stage.
Comparison with Mohenjodaro Soript. 12. The bellows-shaped letter above the animal figure may be compared with the Mohenjodaro letter No. 119 (vol. II, p. 440). The first letter (right-hand) in the top line on Plate 6 should be compared with Mohenjodaro No. 162, and the system of dots with the same system in series 176 (ibid., p. 445).
13. The letter of the shape of the Brahmi g may be compared with Mohenjodaro Nos. 100-102, 133, 144, 146 and 148. The shape of Mohenjodaro No. 133 is identical with thọ eighth letter of the second line in Plato 8.
14. The fourth letter in line 2, Plate 8, may be compared with Mohenjodaro 96 series. A variation of it is found in the seventh, or bottom, line at Vikramkbol.
15. The X shape of Vikramkhol should be compared with Nos. 98-99 of Mohenjodaro.
16. The circlo-letter like the Brahmi th, and the oval letters are noteworthy. They seem to be consonants on account of their repetition in one place. In Plate 7, the third lotter after the animal (reading from left to right) is accentuated. It occurs in Plate 8 with two dots inside, resembling the Brahmi tha. These shapes may be compared with Nos. 224 and 219 of Mohenjodaro. The form at Mohenjodaro is always oval.