The specimen is taken from , a life of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb, of Georg Jacob Kehr, which was printed at Leipzig in 1725. But in view of two other specimens, one published in 1692 and the other in 1729, it can be established that the letters were, in effect, Bengali.Sprachmeister in its page 84 reprint, under the heading of the plate, says, ‘ex G. There have thus been two specimens reprinted twice — the 1715 Chamberlayne’s reprinted in the 1748 Fritz’s and the 1725 Kehr’s reprinted in Fritz’s , Vol IX, Part I.He listed eight specimens: the 1667 Kircher’s, the 1692 Jesuit Fathers’, the 1725 Kehr’s, its 1748 Fritz’s reprint, the 1743 Mill’s, the specimen of 1773 typefounder Joseph Jackson, which is referred to as ‘Modern Sanskrit’ in (Two centuries of Bengali print and publishing) that is edited by Chittaranjan Bandyopadhyay and published by Ananda Publishers Private Limited, Kolkata, in 1981, refers to the 1667 specimen as being the first.Sripantha’s , the French translation that was printed at Amsterdam in 1670, the graceful penmanship as evident in plates of the Kircher book is absent from the plate that Sripantha and Khan have referred to. 30’ has the specimen of 42 Bengali letters and their variants in three columns headed ‘Fig. Page 30 of the book has a sentence referring to Figure 3 as saying ‘Succedit Fig. The text in French says, in translation: ‘The Brahmins of the kingdom of Bengal in writing the Sanskrit language use the letters the way we use letters here.The European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) went into effect on .
The research paper was read out in the opening session of an international academic workshop and conference in relation to the British Library’s project ‘Two Centuries of Indian Print’ that the School of Cultural Texts and Records, Jadavpur University, Kolkata hosted in July 14-15, 2017.Sajanikanta referred to a specimen, printed in , by David Mill, published at Leiden in 1743, as being the third specimen. B.’ and contains the full Bengali alphabet, with consonants followed by vowels.The book has a section called ‘Miscellanea Orientalia’ on the grammar of Hindustani, by Joannes Josua Ketelaer, with a print of the Bengali alphabet, headed ‘Alphabetum Brahminicum’, after that of Devanagari. Commenting on the Devanagari alphabet in , Sajanikanta criticised Mill’s comment on the Bengali alphabet being in currency in the whole of the Indian subcontinent, especially in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa.The list of Bengali print specimens pre-1778, thus, increases: the 1692 Jesuit Fathers’, the 1725 Kehr’s, the 1743 Mill’s, the 1748 Fritz’s and the 1776 Halhead’s.He, however, did not consider the 1725 Chamberlayne’s. The letters are not well-formed but are not difficult to recognise, Sripantha commented.