Indian Palaeography from about B.C. 350 to about A.D. 1300 c7.s9.9

c7.s9.9

With the exception of the Ghasuṇḍī (Nagarī) inscription, which contains no word with a double consonant, all the documents in the mixed dialect offer instances of double consonants which sometimes even are not absolutely necessary. Pabhosa No. 1 has *Bahasatimittrasa* and *Kaśśapīyānaṃ*, No. 2 has *Tevaṇīputtrasya*, Nāsik No. 5 has *siddham*, and Kārle No. 21 has *Setapharaṇaputtasya*.⁷ And the Jaina inscriptions from Mathurā furnish numerous analogous cases.⁸ The only known Sanskrit inscriptions of this period, the Girnār Praśasti from the reign of Rudradāman and Kaṇheri No. 11,⁹ in general show the orthography approved by the phonologists and grammarians, with a few irregularities in the use of the Anusvāra, *e. g.*, *pratānaṃ ā* (Girnār Praśasti, l. 2), *saṃbaṃdhā°* (l. 12), which have been caused by the influence of the popular orthography, but are found in the best MSS. written by Paṇḍits. The orthographic peculiarities, just discussed, have therefore nothing to do with the development of the alphabet, but merely show that in ancient, as in modern, India the spelling of the clerks differed from that of the learned Brahmans, and that both methods, then as now, mutually influenced each other and caused irregularities.