South Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE FEUDATORIES OF THE MAIN BRANCH

v and the old forms of t and j occurring in the present inscriptions. He is therefore definitely of the opinion that these inscriptions belong to the reign of Pṛithivīshēṇa I. In view of this conflict of opinions it is necessary to examine this question rather closely. Dr. Sircar seems to think that the triangular form of v went out of use soon after the time of Pṛithivīshēṇa I and so these records cannot be referred to the reign of Pṛithivīshēṇa II, when the rectangular form of that letter was in vogue. This is not borne out by the inscriptions of the age. As a matter of fact, the rectangular form of v had come into use even before the time of Pṛithivīshēṇa I. We notice several instances of it in the Ēraṇ stone inscription¹ of Samudragupta; see kulavadhūḥ, line 20, vichintya, line 24 etc. On the other hand, the triangular form of v did not disappear soon after the age of Pṛithivīshēṇa I; for we find it used in the Sāñchī inscription² of Chandragupta II, dated G. 93; see e.g. mahāvihārē, line 1, sarvva-guṇa-, line 8 etc. Indeed, it continued in use much longer; for while the inscriptions of the Vākāṭakas generally use the rectangular v, the Poḍāgaḍh stone inscription of Skandavarman³ and the Kesaribēḍā plates of Arthapati⁴ use the triangular form of that letter; see e.g. Bhavadattasya, line 3, and a-pravēśyam, line 8 in the former, and vibhaḥ line 1 and dhruva-, line 7 in the latter. The Nala kings Skandavarman and Arthapati did not flourish earlier than Pṛithivīsheṇa II⁵. It is noteworthy that all the inscriptions mentioned above are incised in boxheaded characters. The triangular form of v is therefore no indisputable evidence which would compel us to assign the present records to Pṛithivīshēṇa I. The same can be said of the so-called old forms of j and t; for these also occur in the Pōḍagaḍh inscription. It is true that the form of v in the present inscriptions is more angular than that seen in the other records mentioned above; but angularity is no sure sign of an earlier age. As pointed out by Kielhorn,⁶ the characters of Pravarasēṇa II’s grants are more angular than those of the Bālāghāṭ plates of his grandson Pṛithivīshēṇa II. Besides, it is not unlikely that the writer of the Nachnā and Ganj inscriptions was influenced by the form of v current in that locality. We must note in this connection that the Nachnā and Ganj inscriptions are the only records in box-headed characters from the Baghēlkhaṇḍ region. The standard form of characters current in that locality was nail-headed as seen in the Mjhgawām plates⁷ of Hastin and the Bamhanī plates⁸ of Bharatabala. The writer of the Nachnā and Ganj inscriptions was apparently not quite familiar with the box-headed characters⁹ though he wrote the records in them evidently to please the Vākāṭaka overlord. He therefore seems to have unconsciously imitated the form of v from the nail-headed alphabet with which he was more familiar. We find an analogous instance in the Poonā plates of Prabhāvatīguptā. The writer of that grant, who probably hailed from North India, was not quite familiar with box-headed characters which were current in Vidarbha. He commenced to write in them the legend on the seal, but after writing the first four letters viz. Vākāṭaka, he gave them up and wrote the remaining legend in nail-headed characters. The triangular form
_____________________

¹ C.I.I., Vol. III, plate facing, p. 20.
² Ibid., Vol. III, plate facing, p. 28.
³ Ep. Ind., Vol. XXI, pp. 153 f.
⁴ Ibid., Vol. XXVIII, p. 12 f.
5 Dr. Sircar thinks that the Nala king Skandavarman was a contemporary of the Early Chālukya king Kirtivarman I (567-97 A.C.). See H.C.I.P., Vol. III, p. 189.
⁶ Ep. Ind., Vol. IX, p. 268.
⁷ C.I.I., Vol. III, pp. 106 ff.
⁸ No. 19, above.
⁹ As observed by Sukthankar, the letters of these epigraphs are uncouth in appearance.