Page:A Sanskrit Grammar.pdf/29

Note—Denandgarf means the Négarf of the gods, or, possibly, of the Brahmans. A more current atyle of writing, used by Hindus in all common transactiona where Hindi is the language employed, is called simply Ndgart. Why the alphabet should have been called Ndgarf, is unknown. If derived from negara, city, it might mean (he art of writing as first practised in cities. (IMin. rv. 2,128.) No authority has yct been udduced from any ancient author for the employment of the word Depvandgarf. In the Lelita-vistara (a life of Buddha, translated fran Sanskrit into Chinese 76 a.v.), where a list of alphabets is given, the Devandgart is not mentioned, unless it be intended by the Dera ulphabet. (See History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, p. 318.) Albiruni, in the 11th century, speaks of the Megara alphabet as current i Malva, (Reinaud, Mémoire sur PInde, p. 298.)

Beghram (thagdidme, ubude of the gods) is the native name of one or more of the most important ties founded by the Greeks, such as Alexandria ad Caucasum or Nicaea. (See Mason's Memoirs in Prinsep’s Antiquities, ed. Thomas, vol. t. pp. 344-390.) Could Devanagari have bern meant as an cquivalent of Beghrami?

No inscriptions have been met with in India anterior te the rise of Buddhism. ‘The earliest authentic specimens of writing are the inscriptions of king Priyadars or Asoka, about 250 uc. These are written in two different alphabets. The alphabct which is found in the inscription of Kapurdigiri, and which in the main is the same as thut of the Arianian coins, is written from right to left. 1t ig clearly of Semitie origin, and most closely connected with the Aramaic branch of the old Semitic or Phenician alphabet. The Aramaic letters, however, which we know from Egyptian and FPalmyrenien inscriptions, have experienced further changes since they served as the model for the alphabet of Kapurdigiri, and we must have recourse to the more primitive types of the ancient Hebrew coins and of the Phenician inscriptions in order to explain some of the letters of the Kapurdigiri alphabet.

But while the transition of the Semitic types into this ancient Indien alphabet can be proved with scientific preeision, the sccond Indian alphabet, that which is found in the inscription of Girnar, and which is the real source of all other indian alphabets, as well as of those of Tibet and Burmah, has not as yet been traced back in a satisfactory manner to any Semitic prototype. (Prinsep's Indian Antiquities by Thomas, vol. 11. p. 42.) To admit, however, the independent invention of a uative Indian alphabet is impossible. Alphabets were never invented, in the usual sense of that word. They were formed gradually, and purely phonetic alphabets always point back to earlier, syllabic ay ideographic, stages. There are no such traces of the growth of an alphabet on Indian soil; and it ia to be hoped that new discoveries may still bring to light the intermediate links by which the alphabet of Girnar,