Kharosti and Brahmi

Abstract

THE EMERGENCE OF WRITING' IN INDIA and relation between two early scripts, Brahm! and Kharosti, have received new attention in last several years.2 A consensus has emerged that challenges Georg Buhler's theories that had widely been accepted in Western scholarship for a century: that BrahmI script was derived for commercial use in eighth century B.C. from an Aramaic alphabet, and that later, during Achaemenid domination of Northwestern India, a more modern Aramaic script was introduced into that part of India and subsequently modified under influence of Brahm! script.3 Several Indian scholars (and some early European scholars) considered Brahmil script an indigenous development, and some tried to derive it from undeciphered script found on seals of Indus Valley Civilization that flourished before 2000 B.C.4 One of problems with Buhler's theory is oddity that Brahmi which is better equipped to write an Indian language, would have been replaced by less apt Kharosti (which would see some secondary modifications under influence of Brdhml). Buhler refers to introduction of Arabic script after Muslim conquest, but parallel is not close: massive influx of Afghans and Turks and introduction of Islam and Quran study into India cannot be compared with few Aramaic scribes who would have served Persian overlords in provinces of Gandhdra and Sindhu. In fact no Aramaic documents of any kind have surfaced from period of Achaemenid domination in India. Raj Bali Pandey5 concluded from this of Aramaic documents that Kharosti1 could not be derived from Aramaic, and that perhaps the Persians did not rule over India directly. But while no Aramaic inscriptions or other texts are known from whole eastern half of Achaemenid empire, Aramaic inscriptions of Asoka, almost a century later, found in Eastern Afghanistan prove importance of Aramaic language and script in that border area. distinctive features of both scripts are well known. Kharosti is more cursive, Brahm! more monumental. While Kharosti is written from right to left, does not differentiate between long and short vowels, and indicates initial vowels with similar signs, Brahm! is written from left to right, distinguishes between long and short vowels, and uses distinctive letters for initial vowels. Neither direction of writing offers distinct advantages-it is like driving either on right side or left side of road. other two features are now seen as improvements of Brahm! over Kharosti, but all is not well with arguments offered. Kharost-1 script used in inscriptions of Asoka, Sakas, and Kusanas does not differentiate between short and long vowels. Buhler, who considered Kharost-1 essentially a clerk's script, spoke of lack of [signs for] long vowels which are useless in everyday usage,6 and Pandey argued that The absence of long vowels in Kharosthi is due to fact that it was used for writing Prakrits which avoid long vowels ... not due to any Semitic influence. While long vowels were usually shortened in all Prakrit dialects before 1 I leave aside here undeciphered script of Indus Valley Civilization of a much earlier time. 2 Oskar von Hinilber, Der Beginn der Schrift undfruhe Schriftlichkeit in Indien, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur, 1989 nr. 11 (Mainz 1989); Harry Falk, Die Schrift im alten Indien (TUbingen 1993); Richard Salomon, Indian Epigraphy (New York 1998). 3 Georg Biuhler, Indische Palaeographie (Strassburg 1896),