Indian Palaeography c15.s3.t1.8

c15.s3.t1.8

(iii) Pl. XI. 3 represents the writing known from two late Gupta copper plates and five copper plates of Dharmāditya, Gopachandra, and Samāchāradeva—all belonging to the sixth century A.D. A study of these inscriptions shows a transition from the Gupta style noted in the second group to certain new features which reached their maturity in the later half of the sixth century A.D. To this last period belongs the Ghughrahati copper plate of Samāchāradeva. The two Gupta copper plates link this group with (ii) above, and the inscriptions of Dharmāditya and Gopachandra fall in between. Palaeographically the inscriptions of Dharmāditya show earlier forms, as has been rightly noted by F. E. Pargiter in his edition of the plates. The difference can be marked not only in the form of *ya*, as was maintained by Pargiter, but also in the forms of *a*, *tha*, *dha*, *pa*, *la*, and *ha*. The inscriptions of Dharmāditya use the sign for *ba* but do not have *sha*, as was the practice in (ii) above, but the inscriptions of Gopachandra have only the sign for *va*, and the Mallasarul inscription at least contains the form of *sha*. But this last plate mentions the name of Mahārāja Vijayasena, who is identified with his namesake mentioned in the Gunaighar plate of Vainya Gupta. Hence Gopachandra is generally taken to be a successor of Vainya Gupta, though the palaeography suggests that Dharmāditya should come between them. But this point need hardly be pressed further, when it is realized that by about this time greater changes had already taken place in the forms of the letters in the neighbouring province of Bihar, as attested by the inscriptions of the Magadha Maukharis. As the same change was to affect Bengal, it is hard to be dogmatic as to the exact time when the change started here. We must allow a margin for the transition period in which the new and old forms were used simultaneously, some inscriptions preferring the new and the others the old. The lesson must be learnt that the palaeography is of little help in settling the question of the succession of rulers when only a short duration of rule is involved.