Indian Palaeography c13.s2.t1.12

c13.s2.t1.12

Bühler, while editing these inscriptions in *Epigraphia Indica*, vols. i and ii, distinguished the inscriptions of the Śaka Kshatrapas from others which he termed ‘archaic’, obviously meaning that these are earlier than the Kshatrapa inscriptions. This classification produced a confusion regarding the date of the Kankali Tila at Mathura, from where most of these inscriptions come. It is hardly justified. The difference between the so-called ‘archaic’ and the Kshatrapa inscriptions is due to the scribes, one being a commoner and the other a royal protégé. Consequently the Kshatrapa inscriptions are ornate, and show greater skill in the handling of the new pen. The other epigraphs lack this skill. But there is no difference in the forms of the letters. This is also true in the case of the Mora inscription, though older forms persisted here. From the point of view of chronology they fall in the same period, i.e. after the coming of the Kshatrapas to Mathura.