________________
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[CHAPTER V
line 4, and with the old form in line 8. Clearly, at this time, the original rule, governing the use of the new form, had become entirely obsolete. It might be used, at pleasure, in combination with any vowel, and in combination with either of the two kinds of stroke.
(6) 482-533 A.D. This period of about fifty years includes a group of similarly worded copper-plate inscriptions (cursive), which all come from the same neighbourhood, ncar the boundary of the eastern area; vis., from Khôh, Long. 80° 51', dated 482, 496, 516, 528, and 533 A.D. (F.GI. Nos. 22, 25, 27-31, pp. 100 ff.), from Kârîtalál, Long. 80° 46', dated 493 A.D. (F. GI. No. 26, p. 117), and from Majhgawâm, Long. 80°47', dated 510 A.D. (F.GI. No. 23, p. 106). At this time and place the new form, both transitional and modern, is found in not infrequent use (35 times in a total
Fig. 28 of 256 y, or upwards of 13'5 per cent.) irrespective of any rule. Thus we have the transitional form with ya in jayasvâmi (a), l. 3, jaya and deya, 1, 5 yathaisha, l. 7 (F.GI, p. 118), and yathaisha, 1. 6, yat (6), l. 16, yada, 1. 19 (F.GI. pp. 122-3); again with yâ in pallikâyâm, I. 6, niya, 1. 11, pratyayâ, l. 12 (F.GI. p. 118), and vidhéyas, 1.12, pratyaya, 1.13, vishthayam, 1. 20, yâvat (c), 1 26 (F.GI. pp. 122-3); and pratyayas (d), 1. 20 (F.GI. p. 127); and mayâ, 1, 11 Forms of yd, yu, ye, and 30 in 482—533 A.D. (F.GI. p. 131); again with yu in yukta (e), 1. 15 (F.GI. p. 122)84 So also the old and new forms are used promiscuously with the superior stroke. Thus we have transitional yê in vriddhâye, 1. 17 (F.GI. p. 118), l. 8 (ib. p. 122), 1. 7 (ib. p. 107), lôpayêt (f), 1. 14, prayêna, 1. 17 (F.GI. p. 122); and modern yê in pâniye, 1. 17, yê (8), 1. 18 (F.GI. p. 108), two good and clear examples. On the other hand, we have old ye in yé, 1. 10. lô payệt, 1. 12, prayê na (h), l. 16 (F.GI. pp. 118-9) vriddhaye, 1. 14, yê, l. 18, lôpayết, I. 21 (S.GI. p. 127), 1. 2 (ib., p. 133). Again, we have transitional yô in chhreyó (i), 1. 15 (F.GI. p. 119), 1. 16 (k, ib., p. 122); and modern yô in chhreyó (1), 1. 14, yo, 1. 16 (F.GI. p. 108), two good cxamples; but old yô in pratyayê (m) 1. 9. yo, 1. 20 (F.GI, pp. 118-9) anvayo, 1. 10, ahayê 1. 18 (F.GI, p. 108); nâgayôh, l. 12, pratyayó, 1. 17, chhrêyô, 1, 23, yo, 1. 28 (F.GI. pp. 127-8); chhrêyê (n), 1. 5, yo, 1. 9 (F.GI. pp. 133-4), all good examples. And, again, the new form is found, used at pleasure, with the lateral or the superior stroke. Thus, the transitional yê with the lateral stroke occurs in nyayêna (o), 1. 13, yé, l. 16, but with the superior stroke in pratyayê (P), 1. 9 (F.GI, pp. 136-7).
(7) 530-533 A, D., the famous group of calligraphic stone inscriptions of Yaśôdharman at Mandasôr, Long. 75° 8' (F.GI., Nos. 33, 34, 35, pp. 142 ff. Plates xxiB, C, and xxii), These records further exemplify, in the interior of the western area, the use of the new form in combination with the superior and lateral strokes. In bhûrayôyéna (Fig. 29a), 1. 8 (ib. p. 153, Pl. xxii), we have the two kinds of stroke side by side, the superior stroke in yê with the old form, and the lateral stroke in yê with the new (transitional) form. Again in the phrase avajiaya yó, 1.4, which occurs in duplicate (ib., pp. 146 and 149), we have, in one copy (b), the two forms of y side by
Fd8% side, the old in yâ and the new (transitional) with a the lateral stroke in yô. In the other copy (c), both forms of pé and 30 in 530-533 A.D. ya and yô are written with the old form, but yo has the superior stroke. In these calligraphically written inscriptions we find still in observance the old role, which we saw growing obsolescent in the cursively written inscriptions of Nąs. 4:6. Another, still more striking example of this conservatism, or archaism, will be noticed in No. 9.
# Another example of a modern yu occurs in a copper-plate inscription (cursive) of the same period, of Sackshobha, at Betul, Long. 78° 22', published in Bp. Ind., Vol. vifi, p. 284, in yudhisthira, 1, 22,
Fig. 29.
an
to court
