Book Title: Indian Antiquary Vol 21
Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple
Publisher: Swati Publications

Previous | Next

Page 40
________________ 34 THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY. (FEBRUARY, 1892. established for MS. writing in the middle of the sixth century A. D. The next oldest MSS. are two, described as Nos. 1049 and 1702 by Mr. Bendall in his Catalogue of Buddhist MSS. in the Cambridge Library, p. xxxix. One of them is dated Samvat 252, which Mr. Bendall takes to be in terms of the Harsla era and to be equal to 857 A. D. For my part, I can see no valid objection, on palæographic grounds, to understanding the date in terms of the Gapta era, and as equal to 571 A. D. I do not notice any such material difference between the writing of the Horiazi MS. and the two Cambridge MSS., as to account for a sopposed interval of three centuries. Anyhow, both Cambridge MSS. exhibit the exclusive use of the cursive form of ya. The conclusion appears to me inevitable, that any MS. which shows, as the Bower MS. does, the exclusive use of the old form, or which shows an uniform absence of the use of the cursiva form, cannot be possibly placed leter than 550 A.D., and in all probability is very much older. The only question is, whether there are any indications in the Bower MIS. that render it possible to fix its date somewhat more detinitely. Here the following facts are to be observed. The first appearance of the modern cursivo form of ya in any inscription is met with in the Bijayagadh inscription of Vishņu Vardhana, of 371 A. D. (Fleet, p. 252), in sreyó, line 4 (if the plate can be trusted); and it is to be noted that it is used in junction with the vowel 8. The old form, however, is more usual, as in ndmadhe. yena, 1. 3, and abhivriddhaye, 1.4, in both cases with the vowell. The first appearance of the transitional cursive form is met with about thirty years later (see below), but there can be no doubt that, though in the existing inscriptions, the first appearance of the modern form happens to be earlier, that form, as compared with the transitional form of the letter, is of later dovelopment.13 Probably there was no great interval between the development of the two forms. In any case, the invention (so to speak) of the transitional form and, with it, the first beginnings of the modern form of ya may, thus far, be placed at about 350 A. D. The actual first appearance of the transitional form is found in the Tusâm inscription (Fleet, p. 269). It occurs in the word yogácháryya, 1. 3, again with the vowel 8, and side by side with the old form in upayőjyam.14 This is a very clear instance; but, unfortunately, the inscription is not dated, though on palæographic grounds it may be referred to about 400 A. D. The first occurrence of the transitional form in a dated inscription is in the Indôr copper-plate of Skanda Gupta, of 465 A. D. (Fleet, p. 68), in the words abhivriddhayé, l. 4, and upayê jyam, 1. 7, in both cases with the vowels é and ô. Side by side, the old form occurs in yogam, 1. 9, yo, 1. 11, abhivriddhayé, 1. 8. Other instances occur in the Kârîtalîi inscription of Jayanatha, of 493 A. D. (Fleet, p. 117), in abhivsiddhayé, 1. 7, and chhreyó, 1. 15, here also with the vowels é and 6; and side by side with the old form in yé, 1. 10, lópayét, 1.12, prüyena, 1. 16, yi, 1. 20. Another instance occurs in the Khôh inscription of Jayantha, of 496 A. D. (Fleet, p. 121), in the word abhivsiddhayé, 1. 8, again with the vowel é, and side by side with the older form in pratyáyópanayan, 1. 11, and práyéna, 1, 17. A very clear instance occurs in the Jaunpur inscription of Isvaravarman, of about 525 A. D. (Fleet, p. 228), in anvaváyé, 1.2, again with the vowel é. So again in the Mandasôr inscription of Yabodharman of about 530 A. D. (Fleet, p. 149), in yo, 1. 4, again with the vowel 8, and side by side with the old form in padayor, l. 5. Similarly in the Mandasôr inscription of Yaśódharman as Vishsuvardhana, of 533 A. D. (Fleet, p. 150), in yéna, 1. 8, again with the vowell, and side by side with the old form in bhúrayó, 1. 8,16 yéna, 1. 8, 13, yo, 1. 17, 18. Likewise in the Khôh inscription of Sarvanatha, of 533 A. D. (Fleet, p. 135), in nyáyêna, 1. 13, 1. yé, 16, and pra 15 A similar case, with regard to the development of the letter m, is noted by Mr. Fleet in his volume on the Gupta inscriptions, p. 3, footnote. 1. This instance was also noticed by Mr. Fleet (p. 270, footnote 4). It is the identical form that occurs in the Bower MS. 16 This is a very good instance for comparison, because in bharayo yena the two forms stand in immediate juxtaposition.

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 ... 430