North Indian Inscriptions

RECORDS OF THE SOMAVAMSI KINGS OF KATAK.

them, a short line slightly curved downwards from left to right. Probably, the standard forms, of both the short and the long vowel, are those which we have in A., and the others are only fancy modifications of them. But the type is essentially the same throughout. It differs totally from the type followed in all the other records quoted above, and exhibited in them by the short i, which consists of two circles with a twirl, of varying shapes, below them.¹ I do not find any close resemblance to it anywhere else.² But it may have been developed from the short i of the earlier Eastern Chalukya records, which was formed by a wavy line or two semicircles joined (easily capable of being developed into the straight line of A.), with two dots or circles below it (see, for instance, Ind. Ant. Vol. XIII. p. 214 and Plate, ih=aijatê and iv=âtipûtaṁ, text line 40) ; the long î and the short u, however, have no connection at all with the long î and the u, long or short, of the earlier Eastern Chalukya records (see, for instance, id. Vol. VII. p. 17, and Plate, îśânataḥ and uttarataḥ, text lines 54, 55, and Vol. XIII. p. 186, and Plate, ûri and ûru, text lines 17, 18, 20, 24). The initial ê, which, with an addition, forms ai (see êka, êtêbhyô, and aivuli, A. lines 10, 12, 18), is a still more remarkable letter. It has no connection with the original triangular character, with the apex placed downwards, from which were derived the forms which appear in the Gwâlior, Pehoa, Asnî, Khajurâhô, Harsha, Dêwal, and Nanyaurâ records ;³ nor with the ê of te earlier Eastern Chalukya records (see, for instance, Ind. Ant. Vol. VII. p. 17, and Plate, êtad, line 55, and Vol. XIII. p. 214, and Plate, êkâdaśa, line 27) : and it can hardly have been developed from even another form of the ê which we meet with in Gujarât (id. Vol. XII. p. 159, and Plate, êlâpur, line 14). In Prinsep’s Antiquities, Vol. II. pp. 40, 41, Plate xxxix., Mr. Thomas has given both the ê and the ai, as we have them in A., as Bengâlî characters of the tenth century A.D.,─ meaning really the eleventh century, as is evident from the fuller heading if his eight line of alphabets in the first half of his Table.

>

But I have not been able to verify his authority for this,─ an inscription from ‘Adisur,’ supposed to be dated A.D. 1065. As far as my knowledge goes, the forms of ê and ai, used in A., are unique in epigraphic records. And, by Mr. Thomas himself in another Table (loc. cit. p. 53), and by a work entitled Grammatography⁴ (see page 45 of it), forms which are practically identical with these, are given as the modern Bengâlî forms. The initial au, which is but very seldom met with, occurs in audalya, F. line 40. It is different in form from, but it may possibly be a development (and, if so, it is certainly later form) of, the au which we have in auttarêśvaraḥ in line 22 of the Harsha inscription of A.D. 973. As in the case of the ê and the ai, the form which we have here is, as far as my knowledge goes, unique in epigraphic records. And, while, as in the case of the ê and the ai, Mr. Thomas has in his first Table allotted this form to the tenth century A.D.,─ meaning really the eleventh century,─ in his second Table he has given a practically identical form as the modern Bengâlî form ; and the Grammatography does the same.
__________________________________________________________________________________________

......¹ Curiously enough, if we remove the straight line which forms the top of the long î as exhibited in A., we have, exactly, the short i of the Dêôgaḍh, Gwâlior, Harsha, Dêwal, Nanyaurâ, and Jhûsî records. But this can be only a chance coincidence.
......² the Chicacole Gaga grant of Satyavarman (Ind. Ant. Vol. XIV. p. 10, and Plate ; the genuineness of this record is open to question) presents an equally peculiar form of the short i,─ exactly an inversion of the ; exhibited in A.,─ two circleat the top, and a straight or slightly curved line below them (see iti, line 20, and idânîṁ, line 22). The only approximation that I can find to this, is the i of iva in line 1 of the Kaḍi grant (Gujarât) of Mûlarâja I., of A.D. 986, where the vowel is formed by two semicircles, with a wavy line below them (Ind. Ant. Vol. VI. p. 192, Plate) ; but throughout the rest of that record the form is the usual one,─ two semicircles, with a twirl below them.
......³ The Chicacole gaṅga grant of Dêvêndravarman (Ind. Ant. Vol. XIII. p. 274, and Plate ; the genuineness of this record, also, is open to question) shew an exact inversion of this original form,─ a triangle with the apex placed upwards (see śvam, line 23).
......⁴ Based on the German compilation of F. Ballhorn, and published (1861) by Trübner & Co.