Implications of Barli Inscription

[W.11]

Barli inscription was discovered in Rajasthan and written in Brahmi alphabet, on paleographic account, the inscription is dated to 1st century BC, shunga period.

There are two theories on the inscription, one is says about vira samvat/death of mahavira, the contemporary of buddha who propagated jainism. Second theory is it states on shunga era on Shunga King Bhagabadra.

if dated to Jain mahavira ers, it will be dated to 443 BC, earliest inscription recorded in india and would also nulify many theories on brahmi script and stone architecture in india, literacy and religion. It shows presence in rajasthan in a very ancient period, which has remained hub of Jainism and propagation of religion from east india at such an early period.

If dated to Shunga era, it will prove the presence of the shungas in rajasthan, but here is the catch, shungas have not been located at rajasthan, neither the translation spells the name of a shunga king bhagabadra.

the mahavira according to jain and buddhist texts was contemporary of Buddha, such association of inscription with jainism is going to change the entire scenario of dating jainism and ultimately buddhism, the history of dating and era in india and this will reassert the tradition dates of both religions.

The implication of Barli inscription is enormous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barli_Inscription

regards

 

[Itachi]

Barli inscription was discovered in Rajasthan and written in Brahmi alphabet, on paleographic account, the inscription is dated to 1st century BC, shunga period.

There are two theories on the inscription, one is says about vira samvat/death of mahavira, the contemporary of buddha who propagated jainism. Second theory is it states on shunga era on Shunga King Bhagabadra.

if dated to Jain mahavira ers, it will be dated to 443 BC, earliest inscription recorded in india and would also nulify many theories on brahmi script and stone architecture in india, literacy and religion. It shows presence in rajasthan in a very ancient period, which has remained hub of Jainism and propagation of religion from east india at such an early period.

If dated to Shunga era, it will prove the presence of the shungas in rajasthan, but here is the catch, shungas have not been located at rajasthan, neither the translation spells the name of a shunga king bhagabadra.

the mahavira according to jain and buddhist texts was contemporary of Buddha, such association of inscription with jainism is going to change the entire scenario of dating jainism and ultimately buddhism, the history of dating and era in india and this will reassert the tradition dates of both religions.

The implication of Barli inscription is enormous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barli_Inscription

regards

All the sources are Indian....and while I'm ok with that....those sources are books written by Indian authors with some ulterior motives.

At least they accept this:

Fun Fact: Aramaic was the language of Prophet Isa (Jesus).....it was the lingua franca of the time & had replaced Hebrew as the language of the Jews in Palestine. Later on, Arabic replaced Aramaic.

if dated to Jain mahavira ers, it will be dated to 443 BC

Barli inscription was discovered in Rajasthan and written in Brahmi alphabet, on paleographic account, the inscription is dated to 1st century BC, shunga period.

Many Indian authors, historians (?) disagree on their exact date as can be seen above.

 

[W.11]

All the sources are Indian....and while I'm ok with that....those sources are books written by Indian authors with some ulterior motives.

At least they accept this:

View attachment 624577

Fun Fact: Aramaic was the language of Prophet Isa (Jesus).....it was the lingua franca of the time & had replaced Hebrew as the language of the Jews in Palestine. Later on, Arabic replaced Aramaic.





Many Indian authors, historians (?) disagree on their exact date as can be seen above.

The use of script in india is attested both by local indic sources and foreign sources, for example a greek historian from pre alexandrian period records the use of writing in india using cotton, i forgot his name but i think if you go to brahmi script article in wikipedia you'll get it. Another evidence is in panini's text/dated to pre alexanderian period as well and probably even pre achaemenid persian period as well. It also doesnt make any logical sense that ashoka would invent a script and then expect people to read it as he inscribes on pillars and erecting in publc places for people to read.

A very curious second observation is the first attestation of arahmaic and greek in ashokan periods, surely the persians and greeks were present since achaemenid and alexander's perio. Does that mean that the greeks and persians present before ashoka were illiterates as no inscription of them from pre ashokan periods as well.

what is your source of this image and article btw?

regards

 

[Itachi]

what is your source of this image and article btw?

Your own wikipedia page....which quotes Indian writers who themselves proclaim everything I have written.

The use of script in india is attested both by local indic sources and foreign sources, for example a greek historian from pre alexandrian period records the use of writing in india using cotton, i forgot his name but i think if you go to brahmi script article in wikipedia you'll get it. Another evidence is in panini's text/dated to pre alexanderian period as well and probably even pre achaemenid persian period as well. It also doesnt make any logical sense that ashoka would invent a script and then expect people to read it as he inscribes on pillars and erecting in publc places for people to read.

I won't comment on the above since you need to have a comprehensive world history education or research to answer the above questions. If you research on your own, I'm sure you'll find the answers.

I do advise you to look in more than one place for world history knowledge.

A very curious second observation is the first attestation of arahmaic and greek in ashokan periods, surely the persians and greeks were present since achaemenid and alexander's perio. Does that mean that the greeks and persians present before ashoka were illiterates as no inscription of them from pre ashokan periods as well.

No, they weren't "illiterate" lol...

Long lasting civ's are based on one part on their writing & spoken systems, the spread of such systems & their military prowess to uphold such social changes.

No one will accept another's language unless it's the "new style", "they're so much advanced than us!", "the elites are doing it and we should copy it". Most of the times a combination of the above.

The answer to your question is that the Indian subcontinent, due to it's infighting & small kingdoms, didn't have a prolific & widespread lingua franca since even the Indian authors in their books mention that Brahmi "had regional peculiarities".....and if you go much further South in the Indian subcontinent, a whole different set of languages emerge, basically the "Dravidian".

So, in a sense, you can say that the people of the subcontinent were "illiterate" in pre-Ashokan times (in comparison to their neighbors to the West) since the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC)....although "illiterate" would not be the proper word to use here just by itself.

Food for thought:

 

[W.11]

I won't comment on the above since you need to have a comprehensive world history education or research to answer the above questions. If you research on your own, I'm sure you'll find the answers.

what education do i need to answer what questions

No, they weren't "illiterate" lol...

Long lasting civ's are based on one part on their writing & spoken systems, the spread of such systems & their military prowess to uphold such social changes.

No one will accept another's language unless it's the "new style", "they're so much advanced than us!", "the elites are doing it and we should copy it". Most of the times a combination of the above.

The answer to your question is that the Indian subcontinent, due to it's infighting & small kingdoms, didn't have a prolific & widespread lingua franca since even the Indian authors in their books mention that Brahmi "had regional peculiarities".....and if you go much further South in the Indian subcontinent, a whole different set of languages emerge, basically the "Dravidian".

So, in a sense, you can say that the people of the subcontinent were "illiterate" in pre-Ashokan times (in comparison to their neighbors to the West) since the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC)....although "illiterate" would not be the proper word to use here just by itself.

Food for thought:

that my friend seems pretty incomprehensibly, what you wrote, but as far as i understood, you probably said that or hinted that the ashokan inscriptions have arahmaic, which means that he copied the superior persian script/language because he was feeling inferior about brahmi right? first of all arahmaic is a script which persians used not language, and it was probably aimed at persian diaspora.

My simple question to you is, if we use the same analogy of brahmi being only from ashokan periods, sinc there is no greek or arahmaic script in pre ashokan afghanistan/pakistan as well, do we naturally assume that those persians and greek communities before ashoka were illiterates?

regards

 

[Itachi]

that my friend seems pretty incomprehensibly, what you wrote, but as far as i understood, you probably said that or hinted that the ashokan inscriptions have arahmaic, which means that he copied the superior persian script/language because he was feeling inferior about brahmi right? first of all arahmaic is a script which persians used not language, and it was aimed as persian diaspora.

I think you need to reread what I wrote lol.

I didn't make any conclusions on my own. And any conclusions or facts I made were based on the available info.

My simple question to you is, if we use the same analogy of brahmi being only from ashokan periods, sinc there is no greek or arahmaic script in pre ashokan afghanistan/pakistan as well, do we naturally assume that those persians and greek communities before ashoka were illiterates?

1) Brahmi had to come from somewhere.....and we all know where pre-Ashokan periods lead to.

2) Aramaic was there since 6th century BCE, several hundred years before the Greek push into Asia. After the Greek push into Asia came the reign of Chandragupta Maurya, first of the Mauryan Dynasty, Ahsoka was the thrid ruler of that dynasty.

3) Basing things on a "analogy" isn't what historians do & if you want to learn, analogies are good but can only take you so far.....you look at different timelines, understand them, the people of the times and connect the dots.

Example:

In between the settlement of the Gangetic Plains, from both the peoples of the IVC (some, not all) and the nomads from further North, the civilizations in the West, in respect to the subcontinent, collapsed, flourished and collapsed again.

But, the "collapsing" didn't mean they became "illiterate"....far from it.

what education do i need to answer what questions

I won't comment on the above since you need to have a comprehensive world history education or research to answer the above questions. If you research on your own, I'm sure you'll find the answers.

I do advise you to look in more than one place for world history knowledge.

You need to read the whole sentence bro.

Let go of what has been fed to you and start researching.

 

[W.11]

Brahmi had to come from somewhere.....and we all know where pre-Ashokan periods lead to.

this notion has been debunked as in ivc script case, it was being linked to linear elamite script, a largely defunct theory now after archeological discoveries.

regards

 

[Itachi]

this notion has been debunked as in ivc script case, it was being linked to linear elamite script, a largely defunct theory now after archeological discoveries.

regards

Again, your either putting words in my mouth or putting your previously learned knowledge on PDF.

I'm talking about the Brahmi script prevalent near & below the gangetic plains while you're talking about the IVC script found in North-West of the subcontinent.

You also seem to have forgotten that the IVC script predates the Brahmi script by more than a thousand years. So I don't know why you keep bringing in the IVC script when I'm talking about the Brahmi script.

But, to put your mind at rest, I was referring to the Brahmi script being based on Semitic scripts (Aramaic & Phoenician).

Evidence:

 

[W.11]

Again, your either putting words in my mouth or putting your previously learned knowledge on PDF.

I'm talking about the Brahmi script prevalent near & below the gangetic plains while you're talking about the IVC script found in North-West of the subcontinent.

You also seem to have forgotten that the IVC script predates the Brahmi script by more than a thousand years. So I don't know why you keep bringing in the IVC script when I'm talking about the Brahmi script.

But, to put your mind at rest, I was referring to the Brahmi script being based on Semitic scripts (Aramaic & Phoenician).

Evidence:

View attachment 624586

i am just stating a case tht at one tine linear elamite was also being considered as origin of ivc script based on similar signs.

secondly the brahmi letters seldom match their phonetic values, brahmi alphabets also match indus symbols as well.

regards

 

[Itachi]

i am just stating a case tht at one tine linear elamite was also being considered as origin of ivc script based on similar signs.

secondly the brahmi letters seldom match their phonetic values, brahmi alphabets also match indus symbols as well.

regards

Well Indian historians (non-Muslim) don't have any better theory on Brahmi script than Western sources.

Indian historians argue from a standpoint of nationalism in that they argue that their language is "indigenous", which has been debunked several times.

The Western sources, most of them reputable & based on much more extensive archeological finds, point towards semitic languages or, a combination of semitic & nomadic languages in regards to Brahmi.

In all of this, the Pakistani & Muslim historians aren't voicing much of their opinions or facts, which is worrisome.

 

[W.11]

Well Indian historians (non-Muslim) don't have any better theory on Brahmi script than Western sources.

proto brahmi has been found

https://archive.org/details/CompositeAntrhomorphicFigureFromHaryanaPragdharaSKManjul/mode/2up

 

[Itachi]

proto brahmi has been found

https://archive.org/details/CompositeAntrhomorphicFigureFromHaryanaPragdharaSKManjul/mode/2up

Indian source...

Plus it's riddled with 3rd grade writing.

Does this look like a "Unicorn"?

More like a Deer...

 

[W.11]

Indian source...

Plus it's riddled with 3rd grade writing.

View attachment 624594

Does this look like a "Unicorn"?

More like a Deer...

so what if its an indian source?

regards

 

[Itachi]

so what if its an indian source?

regards

Current day India, since its 1947 inception, has been going through a historical reform. Basically, they're trying to rewrite their own history and make movies off of it, which the gullible Pakistani population consumes and starts making unfactual theories off of it. They also publish their books and articles made up of half truths. If you read their articles & books, like I did in your OP's post, you'll find them making conclusions that aren't justified based on the facts available.

I would read Indian sources with a big grain of salt. I would also look at non-Indian sources...