________________
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
(FEBRUARY, 1892.
is to say, in the middle of the fifth century (say, about 450 A. D.). The portions C and D, however, may be referred to an earlier part of that period (say 400 A. D.).
This result will probably be startling to most of my readers. There exists - and I admit, hitherto not without reason - a general disposition to discredit any claim to grent age on the part of any Indian manuscript. I used to incline to the same opinion, and the present result was an unexpected one to myself. But I do not see how the force of the evidence can be gainsaid.
Let us see what the objections are. In the first place it is said, that the material of the MS. - birch bark - is of a nature too weak and flimsy to permit us to believe that it could endure for such a length of time. This argument has been already well answered by Mr. Bendall in his Catalogue of Buddhists Sanskrit M88., p. XVII. ff., and by Professor Bühler in the Anecdota O.zoniensia, Vol. I, part III, p. 63ff. No a priori role will apply; all depends on the circumstances under which a MS. may have been preserved; and the argument, from the nature of the material, will not stand for one moment against positive arguments from epigraphic history. According to Lieut. Bower's account, the MS." had been dug out of the foot of one of the curious old eructions just outside a subterranean city near Kachar." These erections are described as being generally about 50 or 60 feet high, in shape like a huge cottage loaf; built solid of sun-dried bricks with layers of beams now crumbling away." I suppose it cannot be doubted that these erections are Buddhist stúpas. Such stúpas often contain a chamber enclosing relies and other objects; these chambers are generally near the level of the ground or "at the foot" (as it is said) of the erection, and they are often dug into by persons who search for hidden treasures. In this way the MS. was probably dug out, perhaps not long before it was made over to Lieut, Bower. In such a practically air-tight chamber there is no reason why a birch bark MS. should not endore for any length of time.
Another objection is that the characters used in a MS. are no guide to its age. It is said that " characters of the Gupta type have been used in very late times, and indeed are in uso to the present day all along the region from which the Bower MS. comes." The characters which are here meant are those used in the Kaśmîr, Chamb and Kangra valleys. They are those which are commonly known by the name “Saradâ characters." These, as already remarked, are a variety of the North-Western alphabet, and are that variety which has more than any other, preserved the shapes of its ancient parent, the North Western Gupta alphabet. Now it is not quite correct to say, that the Saradâ alphabet. has not changed; it is quite possible to distinguish the modern form of the Sarad from its more ancient form. But what is really important is this, that the Sarada alphabet, so far as we have any dated evidence, never possessed, at any period of its existence, the old (Gupta) form of the consonant ya, It always possessed exclusively the modern cursive form of that letter. I maintain, that there exists not a single dated MS. or inscription, written in any variety of the SAradå alphabet, which does not show the exclusive use of the cursive form. This being so, it follows that any conclusions, drawn from facts connected with the Saradâ alphabet, have no application to a MS. which shows the almost exclusive use of the old (Gupta) form of ya, and which, therefore, is not written in the 'Siradâ characters. Now, what conclusions can be drawn from the facts connected with the Sarada alphabet ? Its exclusive use of the cursive ya shows that its elaboration is to be dated on this side of 500 A. D. But as it has but little changed the shape of its letters since the date of its inception, it follows, that any andated MS. or inscription written in the Sarada alphabet must be placed after 500 A. D., but may be placed almost at any time after that epoch. That is really all that can be intended by the principle that the Sarada characters are no guide as to age. More the principle will not bear, and it clearly is not applicable to a MS, which is not written in the Sarada characters, but in a form of alphabet more archaio and very possibly the parent of the Sarada. With the proviso, now explained, I fully agree with Professor Kielhorn's remark, made with reference to a Chambá Grant (ante, Vol. XVII., p. 7) that "it would be impossible to determine the age, even approximately, from its characters,"
