South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

Lakshmêshwar is a well known town, the head-quarters of the Lakshmêshwar subdivision of the Senior Miraj State, within the limits of the Dhârwâr district. The Indian Atlas sheet No. 41 (1852) shews it as ‘ Lukmeshwur,’ in lat. 15° 7′, long. 75° 31′. The record mentions it by the old name of Purigere. The inscription is on a stone which is stored, with various other inscribed stones, at the kachêri. I have no information as to where it was found. And there is nothing to explain why a stone of so irregular a shape should have been used for a formal record.

There are not any sculptures on this stone.─ The writing covers an area ranging from about 5″ broad in line 1 to about 9″ in line 10 and about 1′ 6½″ high, with blank spaces at the top and bottom as if for the purpose of setting it in a wall. It is in a state of fairly good preservation.─ The characters are Kanarese, well formed and well executed. The size of them ranges from about ½″ in the ya of Bâranâsiya in line 11 to about ¾″ in the n to nâlvattu, line 6 ; and the śrî in line 1 is about 2¼″ high, on the slant. They include a final form of m, in line 12, which, however, is damaged and does not appear clearly in the collotype. The distinct form of the lingual ḍ is clearly recognisable in kiḍisido, line 10. As regards the palӕography,─ the kh does not occur. The j occurs in the word râjyaṅ, line 2, No. 6, and is of the old square type, closed. The ṅ occurs in the same word, and again in mûruṅ, line 4 ; it presents the old square type, closed, corresponding to the j, and shews a somewhat unusually marked extension, to the right, of what is ordinarily only a very slight projection or knob in the centre of the letter : it is seen most clearly in the ṅkê of mûruṅ-kêriyâ, line 4, No. 3. The b occurs in line 1 in ballahaṁ, and again in line 10 in Bâraṇâsiya ; it, also, is of the old square type, closed, though the actual forms are considerably rounded off ; it is seen best in the ba of ballahaṁ, line 1, No. 5.

>

The l occurs six times, and is, similarly, of the old square type throughout, though, as with the b, the actual forms are rounded off ; it is seen most clearly in the lva of nâlvattu, line 6, No. 6, where the downstroke is closed in onto the body of the letter, and in kavileya[ṁ]. line 11, where it is not closed in. In the lô of lôkakke, line 12, which is clearer in the estampage than in the collotype, we have the same form of the akshara that we have in, for instance, sakalôttarâ in line 9 of the Vakkalêri grant of Kîrtivarman II. of A.D. 757,^[1] and, earlier, in lôkakke in line 10 of one of the Paṭṭadakal inscriptions of Vikramâditya II. of the period A.D. 733 to 747 ;^[2] it is a somewhat cursively formed variety (but preserving the old square type of the l, and not introducing any approach to the later cursive type) of the old square lô which we have in lôkaḥs in line 3 of the Aihoḷe inscription of Pulakêśin II. of A.D. 634-35,^[3] and in Lôkamahâdêviyarâ in line 3 of the companion Paṭṭadakal inscription of Vikramâditya II.,^[4] and which appears again in modaloḷ in line 9 of the Kanarese grant of Gôvinda III. of A.D. 804,^[5] where, however, there is the difference that the side-stroke which converts le or lê into lo or lô is turned downwards : and the lô, as formed in this Lakshmêshwar inscription, by a modification of the upper part of the l, is more archaic than the lo of puyyaloḷ in line 3 of the Naregal inscription, B. above, which is probably earlier in date ; the vowel is there represented, not by a modification of the upper part of the l itself, but by two distinct vowel-marks attached before and after the entire l. On the other hand, in the present record, in kavileya[ṁ], line 11, the e is formed by a vowel-mark attached to the entire l, instead of being denoted by a modification of the upper part of the l itself, according to the archaic custom, as, for instance, in kâlê in line 16 of the Aihoḷe inscription of Pulakêśin II. of A.D. 634-35.^[6] In geyye, line 3, the subscript y is represented, very exceptionally,

______________________________
^[1] Above, Vol. V. p. 202, and Plate.
^[2] Ind. Ant. Vol. X. p. 164, No. 99, and Plate.
^[3] Page 4 above, and Plate.
^[4] Ind. Ant. Vol. X. p. 164, No. 100, and Plate.
^[5] Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 127, and Plate.
^[6] Page 7 above, and Plate ; and see note 6 on page 5. The proper difference between li and le, lê, seems to have been that in li the i should be denoted by a circle on the top of the straight part of the upstroke of the l, and that in le, lê, the vowel should be denoted by turning in the curve of the top of the letter to meet the top of the straight part of the upstroke.