Indian Palaeography c13.s5.t1.12

c13.s5.t1.12

My dating of these cave inscriptions receives confirmation from the evidence supplied by the excavated materials at Arikamedu (Pl. VII. 11, 12). There some inscribed potsherds have been found in datable strata. Even if we do not rely on the evidence of the stratification, as dated by Wheeler, these inscriptions may also be dated on palaeographical grounds. They fall into two groups. The first, which we will call Arikamedu I, has legends in Tamil, and the script, though crudely scratched on the pots, agrees with that seen in the caves of the Madura and Tinnevelli districts. In Arikamedu II only one potsherd is illustrated, which reads *yakhamitrasya*, and not *yakhamitasa*, as is given in the published report. The importance of this inscription lies not only in the use of a northern language but also in the script, which is quite different from that of the other potsherds. Obviously the difference is due to the persons who made the pots—the single piece of Arikamedu II was inscribed by a potter who knew some Sanskrit, if only very poorly, and who probably came from the north, while the others were made and inscribed by the local southerners. This probably accounts for the marked difference in the scripts followed. The southerner follows the crude style of the cave inscriptions, while the northerner copies forms that can be traced from the records of the Mathura Kshatrapas (note especially the letters *kha*, *ma* and *ya*). Here we get the meeting point of the northern and southern scripts in the first century a.d., dated both by the palaeography as well as by the other materials produced by the archaeologists. This evidence sets at rest all controversies regarding the age of the cave inscriptions. They cannot be placed earlier than the beginning of the Christian era.