________________
242
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[OCTOBER, 1878.
form of the na used in composing it was the names of many of the grantees; in the address form with a loop, whereas in the present in- to future kings on the subject of continuing stance the form used is, as throughout the body the grants; and in their characters, closely of the inscription, that without the loop. Ori- allied, though with distinctive features of their ginally, neither the ta nor the na was formed own,--the two Kaira grants of Dadda II., with a loop; bat in later times the distinguish- given with facsimiles in Prof. Dowson's paper, ing feature of the two letters was that, in the bear so close a resemblance to the present grant south the ta was formed with a loop and the naof Vijayarája that, being grants of a without, whereas in the north, as is clearly different dynasty, they must be almost synchroshown by the modern Devanagari, though not nous with it, and very possibly all three grants so clearly by the modern Bangali, alphabet, the were composed by one and the same person. process was the reverse of this, and the na was These two Kaira grants of Dadda II. are developed by the loop, while the ta retained dated in the same way in words and in figures, substantially its original form without a loop. one in the year 380, and the other in the year In intermediate times there appears to have been385; and here, again, the word sasivatsars considerable hesitation in determining the dis- is used without any specification of the era tinguishing forms of ta and na, and the same to which it refers. In their case, however, this forms were used for each other indifferently; point is made quite clear by a third grant of see, for instance, my remarks at Ind: Ant., Vol. Dadda II., from Ilað, published by ProfesV., p. 176, note t. Iu his paper referred to sor R. G. Bhandarkar at Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. above, the Pandit remarks of the symbol for Soc., Vol. X., p. 19, which, like Prof. Dowson's 4, that "the lower part always shows the figure two grants, was written by Réva, the High of that form of ka which is used in the alphabet Minister for peace and war, and which is dated, of the period." The same rule applies to the in words only, in specifically the year 417 of the symbol for 5; whichever form of the na is used Saka era; the expression in the original, in l. 18, in the body of the inscription, the same form is, -Saka-ntipa-kal-atita-sanhvachchha(ta)ra-sais used in the ná employed to represent the 5. ta-chatushtaye saptadas-adhiké. And the same
The era to which the date of this grant is to precise specification of the era, in words only, be referred is not stated. Prof. Dowson took Saka-npipakal-átita-sarivatsara-satu-chatushtayê, the use of the word sarnvatsara by itself as i.e, 'in (the year) 400 of the years that had indicating that the era referred to was that of expired in the era of the Sa ka king',- is given the Samvat of Vikrama, and he read the in l. 22 of a fourth grant of Dadda II., from date as Vikrama-Samvat 394, or A.D. 338. But Umộtà, published, with facsimile, by Dr. Bühler Mr. K. T. Télang, in a dissertation on this same at p. 61 above. On all these grounds, there can be grant in his paper on a new Chalukya copper- no doubt that the same era is the one intended in plate at Jour. Bo. Br. R. 48. Soc., Vol. X., p. 348, the present grant of Vijayaraja. The date points out,--that samvatsara is a common word of it, therefore, is Saka 394 (A.D. 472-3), and for year,' and refers to no particular era what it is the earliest Chaluky a grant that we as ever,-that even the word sasivat, an abbrevia. yet know of. tion of smvatsara, is not by any means used to After expressing their opinions as to the date, designate exclusively the era of Vikrama;- Prof. Dowson and Mr. K T . Tlang have and that such of the other known grauts of the entered into lengthy disquisitions with the Chalukya dynasty, as bear any date'at all, object of making the genealogy and date of this are expressly dated in the Saka era. On these Chaluky a grant from the north fit in, in grounds, he draws the conclusion that the era direct lineal succession, with the genealogy and intended in the present grant, also, is that of dates of the other chalukya grants from the Saka. In addition to the reasons brought the south. Their views are so radically wrong forward by him, I have to adduce the following. on this point, that it is undesirable to allow In the comparison of the Gûrjara family them to remain without refutation. To enable with the ocean; in the titles of some of theme to refute them, I must point out the errors officials addressed; in some of the conditions on which they are fundamentally based. In and privileges attached to the grants; in the doing so, I must be held excused for occupying
