The Script of Harappa and Mohenjodaro and its Connection with Other Scripts c10.s26.12

c10.s26.12

Of these ŭ, ū and o might be explained as abbreviations of the independent forms of these vowels. In the case of Sign VI 35¹, Proto-Indian has the full independent form of o, But ā, ē, i, I, are susceptible of no such explanation. How then are they to be accounted for otherwise than by assuming that like the other independent signs of the Brahmi script, they are descendent from Proto-Indian prototypes. In the case of ŭ, ⋏ as a variant of ⋏ may be an illustration. In the case of ⋏ and ⋏ we have the prototypes in identical shape and (allowing for the reversal of the direction of writing) in the identical position. Since then we have already shown that ' and " are vowels in Proto-Indian, and we now see that ' and " are vowels in Brahmi, and that their presence in the script cannot be accounted for except on this hypothesis of descent from lost prototypes, can we avoid the conclusion that Brahmi ' is Proto-Indian ' and Brahmi " is Proto-Indian " ? Then we have now fixed the values of Proto-Indian ' and " viz. ' = i, " = i.