{"id":89715,"date":"2025-06-01T10:11:14","date_gmt":"2025-06-01T10:11:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/?p=89715"},"modified":"2025-06-01T10:11:14","modified_gmt":"2025-06-01T10:11:14","slug":"consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/","title":{"rendered":"Consider the following statements:\n \n Statement I: James Prinsep, an o"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Consider the following statements:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Statement I: James Prinsep, an officer in the mint of the East India Company, deciphered Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts which were used in the earliest inscriptions and coins<\/li>\n<li>Statement II: James Prinsep found that most of the scripts mentioned a king referred to as Piyadassi &#8211; meaning &#8216;pleasant to behold&#8217;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>[amp_mcq option1=&#8221;Both the statements are individually true and Statement II is the correct explanation of Statement I&#8221; option2=&#8221;Both the statements are individually true but Statement II is not the correct explanation of Statement I&#8221; option3=&#8221;Statement I is true but Statement II is false&#8221; option4=&#8221;Statement I is false but Statement II is true&#8221; correct=&#8221;option2&#8243;]<\/p>\n<div class=\"psc-box-pyq-exam-year-detail\">\n<div class=\"pyq-exam\">\n<div class=\"psc-heading\">This question was previously asked in<\/div>\n<div class=\"psc-title line-ellipsis\">UPSC CAPF &#8211; 2014<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"pyq-exam-psc-buttons\"><a href=\"\/pyq\/pyq-upsc-capf-2014.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"psc-pdf-button\" rel=\"noopener\">Download PDF<\/a><a href=\"\/pyq-upsc-capf-2014\" target=\"_blank\" class=\"psc-attempt-button\" rel=\"noopener\">Attempt Online<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<section id=\"pyq-correct-answer\">\nBoth statements are individually true, but Statement II is not the correct explanation of Statement I.<br \/>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"pyq-key-points\">\n&#8211; Statement I is true. James Prinsep (1799-1840), a scholar and officer in the mint of the East India Company in Calcutta, is credited with deciphering the Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts in the 1830s. These scripts were used in ancient Indian inscriptions, most notably the rock and pillar edicts of Emperor Ashoka.<br \/>\n&#8211; Statement II is true. While deciphering these inscriptions, Prinsep found that many of them referred to a ruler using titles like &#8216;Devanampiya&#8217; (beloved of the gods) and &#8216;Piyadassi&#8217; (pleasant to behold). It was later confirmed that this &#8216;Piyadassi&#8217; was Emperor Ashoka Maurya.<br \/>\n&#8211; Statement I describes the historical achievement of deciphering the scripts. Statement II describes a significant discovery made *as a result* of that deciphering process. Statement II does not explain *how* Prinsep deciphered the scripts or *why* he was able to do it; it merely states one of the key findings from the deciphered texts. Therefore, Statement II is not the explanation for Statement I.<br \/>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"pyq-additional-information\">\n&#8211; Prinsep&#8217;s decipherment was crucial for understanding the history of the Mauryan Empire and the reign of Ashoka, as these inscriptions provided direct insights into his policies, administration, and spread of Buddhism.<br \/>\n&#8211; The decipherment relied on comparing bilingual inscriptions and coins where available, using known scripts (like Greek on some coins) as keys.<br \/>\n<\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Consider the following statements: Statement I: James Prinsep, an officer in the mint of the East India Company, deciphered Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts which were used in the earliest inscriptions and coins Statement II: James Prinsep found that most of the scripts mentioned a king referred to as Piyadassi &#8211; meaning &#8216;pleasant to behold&#8217; [amp_mcq &#8230; <\/p>\n<p class=\"read-more-container\"><a title=\"Consider the following statements:\n \n Statement I: James Prinsep, an o\" class=\"read-more button\" href=\"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/#more-89715\">Detailed Solution<span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Consider the following statements:<\/p>\n<p> Statement I: James Prinsep, an o<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1085],"tags":[1468,1168,1193],"class_list":["post-89715","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-upsc-capf","tag-1468","tag-ancient-history-of-india","tag-maurya-empire","no-featured-image-padding"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v22.2 (Yoast SEO v23.3) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Consider the following statements:  Statement I: James Prinsep, an o<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Both statements are individually true, but Statement II is not the correct explanation of Statement I. - Statement I is true. James Prinsep (1799-1840), a scholar and officer in the mint of the East India Company in Calcutta, is credited with deciphering the Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts in the 1830s. These scripts were used in ancient Indian inscriptions, most notably the rock and pillar edicts of Emperor Ashoka. - Statement II is true. While deciphering these inscriptions, Prinsep found that many of them referred to a ruler using titles like &#039;Devanampiya&#039; (beloved of the gods) and &#039;Piyadassi&#039; (pleasant to behold). It was later confirmed that this &#039;Piyadassi&#039; was Emperor Ashoka Maurya. - Statement I describes the historical achievement of deciphering the scripts. Statement II describes a significant discovery made *as a result* of that deciphering process. Statement II does not explain *how* Prinsep deciphered the scripts or *why* he was able to do it; it merely states one of the key findings from the deciphered texts. Therefore, Statement II is not the explanation for Statement I.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Consider the following statements:  Statement I: James Prinsep, an o\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Both statements are individually true, but Statement II is not the correct explanation of Statement I. - Statement I is true. James Prinsep (1799-1840), a scholar and officer in the mint of the East India Company in Calcutta, is credited with deciphering the Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts in the 1830s. These scripts were used in ancient Indian inscriptions, most notably the rock and pillar edicts of Emperor Ashoka. - Statement II is true. While deciphering these inscriptions, Prinsep found that many of them referred to a ruler using titles like &#039;Devanampiya&#039; (beloved of the gods) and &#039;Piyadassi&#039; (pleasant to behold). It was later confirmed that this &#039;Piyadassi&#039; was Emperor Ashoka Maurya. - Statement I describes the historical achievement of deciphering the scripts. Statement II describes a significant discovery made *as a result* of that deciphering process. Statement II does not explain *how* Prinsep deciphered the scripts or *why* he was able to do it; it merely states one of the key findings from the deciphered texts. Therefore, Statement II is not the explanation for Statement I.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"MCQ and Quiz for Exams\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-06-01T10:11:14+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"rawan239\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"rawan239\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Consider the following statements:  Statement I: James Prinsep, an o","description":"Both statements are individually true, but Statement II is not the correct explanation of Statement I. - Statement I is true. James Prinsep (1799-1840), a scholar and officer in the mint of the East India Company in Calcutta, is credited with deciphering the Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts in the 1830s. These scripts were used in ancient Indian inscriptions, most notably the rock and pillar edicts of Emperor Ashoka. - Statement II is true. While deciphering these inscriptions, Prinsep found that many of them referred to a ruler using titles like 'Devanampiya' (beloved of the gods) and 'Piyadassi' (pleasant to behold). It was later confirmed that this 'Piyadassi' was Emperor Ashoka Maurya. - Statement I describes the historical achievement of deciphering the scripts. Statement II describes a significant discovery made *as a result* of that deciphering process. Statement II does not explain *how* Prinsep deciphered the scripts or *why* he was able to do it; it merely states one of the key findings from the deciphered texts. Therefore, Statement II is not the explanation for Statement I.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Consider the following statements:  Statement I: James Prinsep, an o","og_description":"Both statements are individually true, but Statement II is not the correct explanation of Statement I. - Statement I is true. James Prinsep (1799-1840), a scholar and officer in the mint of the East India Company in Calcutta, is credited with deciphering the Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts in the 1830s. These scripts were used in ancient Indian inscriptions, most notably the rock and pillar edicts of Emperor Ashoka. - Statement II is true. While deciphering these inscriptions, Prinsep found that many of them referred to a ruler using titles like 'Devanampiya' (beloved of the gods) and 'Piyadassi' (pleasant to behold). It was later confirmed that this 'Piyadassi' was Emperor Ashoka Maurya. - Statement I describes the historical achievement of deciphering the scripts. Statement II describes a significant discovery made *as a result* of that deciphering process. Statement II does not explain *how* Prinsep deciphered the scripts or *why* he was able to do it; it merely states one of the key findings from the deciphered texts. Therefore, Statement II is not the explanation for Statement I.","og_url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/","og_site_name":"MCQ and Quiz for Exams","article_published_time":"2025-06-01T10:11:14+00:00","author":"rawan239","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"rawan239","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/","url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/","name":"Consider the following statements: Statement I: James Prinsep, an o","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-06-01T10:11:14+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-01T10:11:14+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#\/schema\/person\/5807dafeb27d2ec82344d6cbd6c3d209"},"description":"Both statements are individually true, but Statement II is not the correct explanation of Statement I. - Statement I is true. James Prinsep (1799-1840), a scholar and officer in the mint of the East India Company in Calcutta, is credited with deciphering the Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts in the 1830s. These scripts were used in ancient Indian inscriptions, most notably the rock and pillar edicts of Emperor Ashoka. - Statement II is true. While deciphering these inscriptions, Prinsep found that many of them referred to a ruler using titles like 'Devanampiya' (beloved of the gods) and 'Piyadassi' (pleasant to behold). It was later confirmed that this 'Piyadassi' was Emperor Ashoka Maurya. - Statement I describes the historical achievement of deciphering the scripts. Statement II describes a significant discovery made *as a result* of that deciphering process. Statement II does not explain *how* Prinsep deciphered the scripts or *why* he was able to do it; it merely states one of the key findings from the deciphered texts. Therefore, Statement II is not the explanation for Statement I.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/consider-the-following-statements-statement-i-james-prinsep-an-o\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"UPSC CAPF","item":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/category\/upsc-capf\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Consider the following statements: Statement I: James Prinsep, an o"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#website","url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/","name":"MCQ and Quiz for Exams","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#\/schema\/person\/5807dafeb27d2ec82344d6cbd6c3d209","name":"rawan239","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/761a7274f9cce048fa5b921221e7934820d74514df93ef195a9d22af0c1c9001?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/761a7274f9cce048fa5b921221e7934820d74514df93ef195a9d22af0c1c9001?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"rawan239"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com"],"url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/author\/rawan239\/"}]}},"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/89715","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=89715"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/89715\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=89715"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=89715"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=89715"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}