Talk:Anga Lipi

Hot copy

http://www.museumstuff.com/learn/topics/Anga_Lipi will promptly contain a copy of this text, with their copyright, as it is a "hot" mirror of WP.- Sinneed 21:08, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

A book

Found a source, added. "Anga" was an ancient region... it also has other uses, not clear which applies. "Lipi" is an old Greek (no idea about modern) word for "script". Hope that helps.- Sinneed 21:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Wording, structure.

I cleaned the citations a bit, removing red links and some minor problems. I tried also to help with wording, language and structure, please look at what I changed, and watch for any errors I may have introduced. I hope the changes prove helpful.- Sinneed 00:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Article should be deleted.

The is 'no' writing system that exist named Anga/angika script. There are no evidences from inscriptions, manuscripts, coins, books,historical records showings. Lalitavistara mentions 64 scripts. Many are hypothetical and Anga is one of them. Brahmi and Kharashthi and some regional scripts were real. Scholars denote the names mentioned need not indicate scripts. No wrong information/articles should be posted on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ಶ್ರೀ (talk • contribs) 08:37, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree this information is highly dubious. This cited reference to Burnell's "Elements of South-Indian Palabography" actually is some odd misspelling of "Elements of South-Indian Palaeography". I don't think I can believe that the person who added this reference was really looking at the book if they don't even know what paleography is. The cited reference does say that Anga was a real script, but if you read the rest of the sentence (p. 52), it goes on to say "though it is against all the evidence of the inscriptions that they existed as distinct alphabets before the ninth or tenth century A.D." I've seen this same nonsense time and time again on these Brahmi-related articles, supported by fake and misrepresented references. See an on line copy of Burnell, https://archive.org/details/elementssouthin05burngoog Tarchon (talk) 23:04, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Burnell is the only good source I can find that takes this Anga-lipi thing in the Lalitavistara seriously, and Burnell was writing so far back that I can't put a lot of trust in it. Apparently, Burnell thought that the script list was a late interpolation, but it does appear the earliest Chinese translation which is probably 3rd C, so it appears that the script list goes back to at least around the 3rd C CE. I haven't been able to find the contents of the earliest Chinese version to see if it confirms the inclusion of Anga-lipi though. I'd have to conclude that the "Anga lipi" of the Lalitavistara was probably a minor regional variant of Brahmi at the time it was written, but I haven't been able to find any good and recent authority that deals with the subject. Tarchon (talk) 18:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Delete this Fake Article without any source or proof

Anga lipi is a fake Concept. If that type of Script existed then surely It would have any evidence or proof. There are no any Anga lipi mentioned in Lalitvistar. And Angika also the Dialect of Maithili language so all Angika Speaker should be write in Tirhuta Script of Maithili. I request to the Wikipedia's senior editor please delete this Article which has no any evidence or reference. Abhinav400 (talk) 16:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)