Elements of South-Indian Palæography, from the Fourth to the Seventeenth Century A.D. c4.4

c4.4

[^1): Kopp (in 1821) first suggested a foreign Semitic source of the Devanāgari alphabet. Dr. R. Lepsius followed in 1834: and then with much stronger arguments came Profr. A. Weber (Z. D. D. M. G. x. pp. 389 and ffg. "Indische Skizzen" pp. 127-150). He has always been the strongest supporter of this theory. But many consider it probable: Profr. Th. Benfey ("Orient und Occident" iii., 170); Profr. Max Müller (A. S. L. 2nd ed. p. 521). Profr. N. L. Westergaard ("Über den ältesten Zeitraum der Indischen Geschichte" p. 37) hesitates. He considers it likely that writing was, originally, in India *a* secret known to the traders only. I am not able to refer to Böhtlingk's article on the age of writing in India mentioned by Lassen. Profr. Pott ("Etymologische Forschungen, Wurzel-Wörterbuch" ii., 2 p. liii.) is not however satisfied (1870). Mr. E. Thomas (1866) suggested a Dravidian origin of the Indian alphabets. Profr. Lassen repudiates a foreign origin for the Indian alphabets (I. A. K. Vol. I. 2nd ed. p. 1008) altogether. Profr. Whitney ("Studies" p. 85) considers a Semitic origin probable. [^2): Frag. F. in "Reliqua Arriani et Scriptorum de rebus Alexandri". Ed. C. Müller, Paris, 1846 (p. 60.) [^3): "Megasthenis Indica" ed. Schwanbeck, Frag. xxvii. (fr. Strabo. xv. 1. 53-56) p. 113. [^4): Do. Frag. xxxiv. (from the same source). pp. 125-6.