________________
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.
