Indian Palaeography c16.s1: Scope

Indian Palaeography c16.s1

Language: English

c16.s1.12 — 3 parts

Scope

c16.s1.1

THE first systematic study of the *Ancient Inscriptions in Ceylon* began with the publication of a book bearing this title by Dr. Edward Müller in 1883. The later discovery of a large number of further inscriptions led to the issuing of a regular journal, called *Epigraphia Zeylanica*, in imitation of the *Epigraphia Indica*. Every inscription edited in this journal has a paragraph devoted to its script, but generally greater stress is laid on the historical contents of the inscriptions, and on the basis of the available historical clues an attempt is made to identify any ruler mentioned in them, and to fit him into the chronology built up by a study of the traditional history of Ceylon. Sometimes palaeography is used to fix the date of the ruler, but more often the date of an epigraph is determined by the identification of the ruler and his place in the traditional chronology. Wherever an epigraph is dated on its own merits, it is done on the basis of its relation to the writing styles of South India, e.g. the earliest inscriptions of Ceylon have been compared with Aśokan Brāhmī, and it is assumed that they are roughly of the same date, if not earlier, as is suggested by Dr. Vimalananda. This assumption is more probably based on the tacit belief in the traditional story of Aśoka's mission to Ceylon than on the actual analysis of the writing. On the basis of such dates given to the epigraphs Dr. S. Paranavitana drew up a chart, entitled 'Evolution of the Sinhalese script between the fourth and ninth centuries'.¹ The same material was used by Dr. T. Vimalananda for his thesis.² In this thesis four broad chronological divisions are made, under which the changes in the letter-forms are described. The divisions are: (i) 247–3 b.c., (ii) 3 b.c.–a.d. 490, (iii) a.d. 490–703, and (iv) a.d. 703–1073.

c16.s1.2

¹ *Ep. Zeylanica*, iv, pl. 15, facing p. 150.

c16.s1.3

² University of London, 1951, thesis entitled 'Epigraphy and Palaeography of Ceylon down to Tenth Century a.d.'

c16.s1.4

From these two palaeographical studies we no doubt learn about the changes that a particular letter assumed in different epigraphs, but we hardly get at the underlying principles that caused these changes. The charts may create an impression that all the new forms were locally evolved. But this is not true. Besides the local factors, extraneous influences were largely responsible for introducing new forms into the island. All of them have to be reduced to particular schools and then related to local or foreign styles. The local style is apt to preserve older forms at an unexpectedly late date, but the foreign elements and their influences help in determining the chronology. On the basis of these two working hypotheses a study of the Ceylonese inscriptions down to the eighth century A.D. is here made, and the writing is analysed purely on a technical basis. No help is drawn from the traditional history in fixing the date of the inscriptions.

c16.s1.5

*Nature of writing*

c16.s1.6

There is nothing in the early Ceylonese script which would suggest an origin independent of Indian writing. The Ceylonese phonology as well as the forms of the letters are inseparably connected with those of India, but once a particular script was introduced into Ceylon its later development followed a pattern not necessarily in line with those that obtained in India. In this evolutionary aspect conservatism is a striking feature of Ceylonese writing. While the Indian styles changed from time to time with new technical advances, the older forms tended to survive in Ceylon, probably because of the absence of appreciable change in the technique of writing. This particular feature is termed hereafter the 'conservative writing' of Ceylon. It is this writing which evolved into the later Sinhalese script. But the evolution clearly shows extraneous influences from peninsular India, traceable mainly to five different sources: (i) the Śātavāhana and Western Kshatrapa records, (ii) the cave inscriptions of the extreme south, (iii) the Ikshvāku epigraphs of the eastern coast, (iv) the inscriptions of the Kadambas and other rulers of the western coast, and (v) the Pallava Grantha writing. In Pl. XIX I have given a selected specimen of the scripts showing the conservative writing and the foreign styles that reached Ceylon, but it was not possible to show in detail the influence of each of the latter on the evolution of the local style. I have attempted here to separate the conservative writing from the foreign scripts which from time to time penetrated Ceylon, and to build up a chronology of the alphabetic system in the light of the intruding elements. This chronology may or may not agree with the traditional history of Ceylon, but as my purpose is to study the palaeography of Ceylon, and not to establish the chronology of the Ceylonese kings, I can leave the latter question to the historians.

c16.s1.7

There are a limited number of inscriptions from Ceylon, which are written from right to left. The only inscription published so far comes from Duwe Gala cave no. 7.¹ D. C. Sircar comments on this inscription:

c16.s1.8

¹ *Ceylon Antiquary and Literary Register*, iii. 104, pl. xx.

c16.s1.9

This peculiar characteristic of the record which appears to belong to about the first century B.C. suggests that either the Brāhmī script was introduced in Ceylon before Aśoka (*c.* 273–232 B.C.) who writes it from left to right or less probably that it was influenced by an earlier script of the South. Excepting some portions of the barbarously engraved Yerraguḍi MRE, Aśoka’s Brāhmī records are not to be read from right to left. The present epigraph possibly proves that, like Kharoshṭhī, Brāhmī too was originally written from right to left.²

c16.s1.10

² *Select Inscriptions*, p. 233, n. 1.

c16.s1.11

This remark of Dr. Sircar is hardly justified, as there is no evidence of a pre-Aśokan Brāhmī in Ceylon, nor of ‘an earlier script of the South’. These inscriptions cannot be taken as survivals of an earlier practice in the absence of any definite early specimen. The present inscription shows a crude version of the writing that prevailed in Ceylon in the first to second century A.D. Here some of the letters, such as the second *da*, *śa*, *ta*, are reversed, while the others, such as the first *da*, *le* and *ṇā* are written in the right way. The letter *da* recalls the forms seen in Pl. XIX. 4 and 5, while *la* has its upper end curved to the left. This reverse order of the letters is best taken as a mistake on the part of the engraver.

c16.s1.12.1

A. Pl. XIX. 1 and 2. The earliest examples of Ceylonese writing come from the caves of Vessagiri, Ritigala, Keramba Hina and Naulpata. These cave inscriptions are related to one another not only by their contents but also by the particular kind of the rock surface on which they are inscribed. Morphologically they are reducible into two groups. Inscriptions included under no. 1³ have long verticals as in the earliest inscriptions from India, but cave inscription no. 12 from Vessagiri, which falls under no. 2, has its verticals equalized—a practice which started in North India after the Mathura Kshatrapa inscriptions in the first century A.D.¹ But this practice did not reach Ceylon directly from the north, as is clear from the letters which are akin to southern characters. Hence no. 2 can hardly be dated earlier than the beginning of the second century A.D. Here we find only three medial vowels, *i*, *u* and *e*. Of these the medial *u*, when added to *pu* and *su*, is a downward extension of the right vertical—a later practice. The letter *ka* has its vertical longer than its cross bar. *Ta* has a hook attached to the right of a vertical in the Deccani style. The angularity is well marked in the forms of *pa*, *sa* and *ha*. *Va* has a triangular base. The letter *ma* copies the form of the southern caves. The conjunct *sra* has its *ra* appended at the right bottom of *sa*. There is a certain unity in the inscriptions included under no.

c16.s1.12.2

1, though here also different traditions are traceable. Of the initial vowels the most distinctive is *a*, where the two left curves meet the right vertical separately—a practice which became common in the post-Aśokan period.² The initial *u* generally has its vertical longer than the horizontal. The medial *i*, as in *ki*, *chi*, *di* and *ri*, starts from the middle of the vertical; the medial *u* is applied to the left, middle, or right of the base line, and the medial *o* in *śo* is a horizontal line drawn across the angular peak of *śa*. These features again point to a late date. In the letter forms two traditions are marked—one with rounded features, and the other with angular forms, especially in Ritigala cave inscriptions nos. 2–7. The angular features can be seen in the forms of *a*, *ḍa*, *da*, *pa*, the triangular base of *ma*, *la*, *sa* and *ha*. Occasionally the vertical of *ka* is equal in length to its cross-bar. *Ga* has an angular peak. *Gha* in Ritigala nos. 8–10 has its left vertical slightly longer than the remaining two. *Ṭha* has a flat base. Both *ṇa* and *na* have short bases. *Ta* is of the Deccani type with an inclined stroke to the right of a vertical. The mouth of *da* is open to the left. *Ba* is a square. *Bha* in Ritigala cave inscriptions nos. 8–10 follows the older form, but its upper stem is added by mistake to the left instead of to the right.

c16.s1.12.3

*Ma* has varying forms—the first is of the southern cave type with a horizontal line within bent arms, which has been called the Dravidian *ma*;³ the second is of the Nanaghat or Girnar style with two upper diagonals projecting from a circular base;¹ the third variety has its upper strokes curved; and the fourth variety, which occurs only once, has the upper curving strokes separated from the circular base by a line. *Ya* has a crescentic base with the middle vertical extended. *Ra* is either a straight or serpentine vertical line. *Va* usually has a rounded base. *Śa* has an angular peak, but its right limb is shorter than its left, and the mid-stroke is attached to the left limb. The writing in these inscriptions is clearly related to that of the Nanaghat records in Western India and that seen in the caves of the extreme south, though local tendencies in the application of the medial *i* and *o* and the peculiar forms of *śa*, *bha* and *ra* are obvious. In any case there is no reason to date these inscriptions earlier than their Indian counterparts, and according to the chronology of the Indian inscriptions already discussed² these inscriptions may also be dated about the beginning of the first century A.D.

c16.s1.13

³ See Bibliography at the end of the chapter, p. 225.

c16.s1.14

¹ See above, pp. 51–53.

c16.s1.15

² See Chapter 5, pp. 50–74.

c16.s1.16

³ See above, p. 73.

c16.s1.17

¹ See above, p. 66.

c16.s1.18

² See above, p. 73.

c16.s1.19

B. Pl. XIX. 3 is taken from the two Vevala-tanna inscriptions, and Pl. XIX. 4 is derived from Maha Ratmale, Naulpata, and Vessagiri rock inscriptions. These two groups of inscriptions make a fundamental departure from the earlier writing. Over and above the fact that these are rock engravings, except one at Vevalatanna, there is a marked improvement in the manner of engraving the letters compared with the cave writing of the earlier group. The forms are no longer crude, but speak of an experienced hand. There is no mistake in the actual drawing of the letters. But these forms do not evolve from the earlier cave writing. They belong to altogether different traditions, almost identical with the writing of the later Sātavāhanas and the early Western Kshatrapas (Pl. IX. 1, 2, 3). The Vevala-tanna inscriptions come closest to the writing seen in the records of Gautamīputra Sātakarṇi. The date 215 read in one of these inscriptions and calculated according to the Ceylonese Buddha era to be 93 B.C.³ does not appear to be correct. I do not think that the signs represent numeral figures at all. They clearly read *makasa*. In the two inscriptions from Vevala-tanna there is a stylistic difference. The cave writing here has equalized verticals, while the rock engraving still maintains unequal verticals. The letter-forms have rounded features, but the lower ends of the verticals are not curved. The medial vowels are now given regularly, as seen in the Sātavāhana records. *A* still has its two left curves meeting the right vertical separately. Both *ga* and *śa* have rounded tops. *Ta* is of the Deccani type. *Da* has its mouth open to the left. *Ra* is serpentine. *Ma* copies only the Sātavāhana form.

c16.s1.20

³ By Dr. Wickremasinghe in *Ep. Zeylanica*.

c16.s1.21

Inscriptions included under category no. 4 may be compared with the writing seen in the records of the Sātavāhana ruler Vāśishṭhīputra Puḷumāvī (Pl. IX. 3). Here the lower ends of the verticals in *a*, *ka*, *ra*, and the vertical type of the medial *u* are curved to the left. The initial *a* now copies two Sātavāhana forms—the first has its two left curves meeting the right vertical at the same point, and the second has its upper left curve broadened and the lower one appended from the left side of the former curve. The medial *i* is a tall curve either going to the left or bending to the right, as seen in the Mathura Kshatrapa inscriptions.¹ Identical Sātavāhana forms can also be seen in the consonantal types used in these inscriptions. The notable examples are *cha* with a beaked loop below a stem; both *ḍa* and *da* with rounded backs and their mouths open to the right; *ta* with a broad curve added to the right of a vertical; *dha* with its left arc rounded or pointed; the slightly bent left sides of *pa*, *ba* and *ha*; *bha* of the broad type; *ma* with a triangular looped base; *ya* round- or flat-based; the right vertical of *la* inclined to the right; and *va* as a triangle without an upper stem. Henceforward *śa* and *sha* are not used in the Ceylonese inscriptions, except in the Sanskrit records of much later date. Another local peculiarity is the reduction of the horizontal lines in *ṇa* and *na*—a practice which henceforward becomes typical of Ceylon. On the evidence of this analysis these inscriptions may be placed in the later half of the second century A.D.

c16.s1.22

¹ See above, p. 64.

c16.s1.23

C. Pl. XIX. 5 is taken from the Palu Makichava rock, Thuparama slab, and Viharegala rock inscriptions of Gāmini Abhaya, and from another Viharegala rock inscription of Saba. The writing in these inscriptions is of the Sātavāhana type, dealt with in B above, but the fundamental difference is that here for the first time we see line head-marks over the verticals, possibly an influence from the Western Kshatrapa style. Some new forms are also introduced from the late Sātavāhana records: the initial *u* has its vertical shortened; the initial *o* has its angles rounded; *cha* optionally loses its upper stem; *ta* is of the looped type; *la* has a tall straight vertical on the right; and *va* has a circular loop below a stem. In spite of these new influences the writing is somewhat retrogressive. The older forms persist in *a*, *ka*, *ṇa*, *na*, *ba*, *ya* and *ra*. These inscriptions may be placed in the first half of the third century A.D.

c16.s1.24

D. Pl. XIX. 6 is taken from Perumaiyan-kulam rock and Vallipuram gold plate inscriptions of Vasabha and from the Jetavanarama inscription of Maḷutissa. Of these the gold plate inscription has an individual character of its own. In this particular case the lower curves of the verticals are over-emphasized, and the medial *i* has a sharp curve to the left. The other two inscriptions are remarkable for their graphic writing, well-drawn forms, and symmetrical arrangement of the letters, such as is found only in the Ikshvāku records in the south-east coast of India.¹ In the same fashion the letters are characterized by triangular head-marks. The medial *i* is a tall curve to the left, and the verticals in *a*, *ka* and *ra* and the vertical type of the medial *u* are emphasized. But the local forms are preferred in *cha*, *ṇa*, *ta* and *na*. The Ikshvāku forms are marked in *a*, *i*, *u*, *ka* (optionally), *ga*, *ma*, *ya*, *ra*, *la* and *va*. From the same source is copied the letter *ḷa*, which appears for the first time in Ceylon. The editor of the Perumaiyan-kulam inscription places it towards the close of the first century A.D. and says that it is earlier than the Maha Ratmale inscription discussed above in group B. But this is hardly likely. The evolution from the Sātavāhana to the Ikshvāku writing is quite clear in the south-east coast of India. In these Ceylonese inscriptions we have definite evidence of the school of Amaravati and Nagarajunikonda writing reaching Ceylon, probably in the latter half of the third century A.D.

c16.s1.25

¹ See above, p. 98.

c16.s1.26

E. Pl. XIX. 7 is taken from Tonigala, Timbirivara, and Vessagiriya rock inscriptions. The writing is conservative, but is largely influenced by the Ikshvāku style. Though the graphic character of the Ikshvāku writing is not seen here, some of its features continue. The line head-marks over the verticals are clearly seen. The new type of the Ikshvāku *a* is seen side by side with the older local form having two left curves joining the right vertical separately. The initial *i* with three lines is of the Ikshvāku type, but generally the third right line is wanting. *U* has its base curved upwards. *E* is almost a circle. The medial *i* retains both the varieties of the previous period. The medial *o* is merely a line above the letters, as in *ko*. The cross-bar of *ka* is very short. *Ga* is round topped with a line foot-mark at the left limb. *Cha* is of the beaked type with no upper stem. *Ja* optionally has its vertical curved. Both *ṇa* and *na* are of the local type, but *ta* optionally is of the looped variety. *Ya* has a flat base with its middle vertical slightly lengthened. *Ra* is generally a straight vertical. *Lo* has its medial *o* applied in the South Indian cursive manner. *Ḷa* copies the Ikshvāku form. The vowelless *m* in *ddham* is placed in line with the other letters. Hardly any new influence is found in these letter-forms except the medial *o* in *lo*, which does not appear in India before the fourth century A.D. These inscriptions may be placed in the same century.

c16.s1.27

F. Pl. XIX. 8 is taken from the Ruvanvälisäya pillar inscription of Buddhadāsa; Pl. XIX. 9 is derived from the fragmentary Jetavanarama inscription; and Pl. XIX. 10 is from the Kiri Vehera slab and Anuradhapura slab inscriptions. Of these nos. 8 and 9 introduce a new style of writing from India. But no. 10 resuscitates the conservative writing as influenced by this new style. Dr. B. Ch. Chhabra¹ compares no. 8 with the Cho Dinh rock inscription (Pl. XX. 4) from Indo-China, but the firm straight lines of the Cho Dinh inscription represent a fundamental difference from the notched horizontals of the Ruvanvälisäya inscription. As will be shown later,² the Cho Dinh inscription comes closer to the square-headed writing from Malwa, but the present inscription no. 8 clearly shows the influence of stylus writing. Here the head-marks are also notched. The forms are akin to those appearing in the Kadamba inscriptions of the fourth to fifth century A.D., though here in Ceylon the medial vowels retain the local forms. Notches can be seen in the cross-bar of *ka* and the horizontals of *ṭa*, *ḍha*, *ṇa*, *pa*, *ma*, *ya*, *la* and *ha*. The left sides of *pa*, *ba* and *ha* are bent. *Ya* has its third left arm shorter than the others, and it is slightly curved inwards. *Na* copies the Kadamba form with its base curved and the upper horizontal split into two strokes ending in curls. *Ta* is of the looped variety. *La* has its right vertical curved inwards, and *va* has a circle below a stem. In no. 9 we see the fully developed square-headed type of writing introduced into Ceylon from the country of the Kadambas. We get here the roof type of *i*, the foot type of *cha*, and the looped varieties of *ṇa*, *na* and *ta*. Notches are also seen in this inscription as in no. 8. Both these inscriptions may be placed in the fifth century a.d. In no. 10 head-marks are faintly traceable but the letter-forms are much simplified. Notches are seen only in *cha*, *ma* and *va* (optionally). The curves at the lower verticals are also gone. *Cha* is of the foot type and *ta* of the looped variety. The local developments can be seen in *a*, which extends its lower hook almost to touch the right vertical, *ka* having a short curved bar, *ṇa* and *na* both having short horizontals, and *ya*, which has either three straight verticals on a base or a curl at the left vertical. Other letters are of the same type as seen in nos. 8 and 9. These inscriptions may be placed in the latter half of the fifth century a.d.

c16.s1.28

¹ *J.A.S B.*, 1935, p. 10.

c16.s1.29

² See below, p. 233.

c16.s1.30

G. Pl. XIX. 11 is taken from Nagarikanda, Nilagama, Vessagiriya, and Burrow's Pavilion inscriptions; Pl. XIX. 12 is derived from Dakkhina Thupa rock inscription of Dathopatissa. These inscriptions introduce a style which is in conformity with the conservative writing. The new developments are clearly marked in no. 11, while no. 12 is a further simplification of this style. These letter-forms could well be evolved locally, but as they are found in a limited number of inscriptions, issued within a limited period, it is likely that they were borrowed from outside. But this style of writing is not known in India, except in one inscription, the Siroda plates of Devarāja (Pl. XVIII. 1), which has been dated in the sixth century a.d.¹ As no details are known regarding the palaeographical developments in Goa, it is difficult to be certain about the question of borrowing. If this style was not local to Goa, it may be taken as a counter-influence from Ceylon on the western coast of the mainland. The initial *a* is completely changed in no. 11, though in no. 12 it retains the old form. In no. 11 the lower left curve is stretched up to the right vertical and the middle horizontal is optionally dropped. In the final form we find only the upper curve slightly broadened on the left and there is no trace of the lower curve. The initial *i* is of the double-roofed variety in no. 11, as in the inscriptions from Gujarat (Pl. XVI. 8–10). *E* in no. 11 is a further simplification of the foot type with its mouth open upwards, but in South India the foot is placed to the left and here it is to the right. The form of *o*, which is wrongly read as *u*, is a type well-known in the south. The medial vowels are usually local, except the circle type of *i*, which is copied from the mainland. Of the consonants the most remarkable are the following: the round-topped form of *ga* with left limb optionally curved inwards; *cha* in a new form, besides the foot type, a triangle with its right arm extended upwards; *cha*, *ḍha*, *pa* and *ha* with notches in the lower sides of the foot type; *ṇa*, of the local type with insignificant horizontals; *ta*, optionally of the looped variety; *na* with a closed loop at the left; a new type of *ma* with its mouth closed by a line, as occurs also in the Siroda plates; *ya* either of a simple tripartite form, as in the Siroda plates, or bipartite with an optional loop at the left; *la* with lower curve broadened; and *sa*, optionally the simplified version of a form which has an open-mouthed triangle at the left corner. On the basis of these characteristics no. 11 may be placed in the sixth century a.d., and no. 12 in the seventh century.

c16.s1.31

¹ See above, p. 196.

c16.s1.32

H. Pl. XIX. 13 is taken from the Kondakadu rock inscription of Upatissa. The writing is a further development from the style described in group G above. Here the letter forms are identical with those seen in no. 11, but there is a stylistic difference. The writer in this inscription prefers to add small circles at the beginning or end of the lines. This tendency is known only from the Bannahalli plates of the Kadamba ruler Kṛishṇavarman II (Pl. XVI. 3), which has already been dated¹ in the mid sixth century a.d. This particular tendency gives further support to the suggestion that the style of writing seen in no. 11 is borrowed from this region of peninsular India. The present inscription may be placed in the early seventh century a.d.

c16.s1.33

¹ See above, p. 183.

c16.s1.34

I. Pl. XIX. 14 is taken mainly from the Tiriraya rock inscription. The writing seen here copies the Pallava Grantha style of the seventh to eighth century a.d. (Pl. XVIII. 9–11). The Kuchchaveli rock inscription gives the simplified version of this style. The only initial vowel known is *i*, which is of the double-roofed type with a line joining the right roof and the dot below. Double-ruled lines are seen in the verticals of *ka*, *ra*, and the vertical type of the medial *u*, and also the subscript *ya*. *Kha* is seen for the first time in Ceylon. It has a broad looped base, and sometimes the mouth of this loop opens upwards. The left limbs of *ga* and *śa* curve outwards. *Gha* is of the simple type with three uprights on a base. *Ja* shows the simplified version of the Grantha form, in which the loop in the lower arm is lost; but the Sinhalese inscription no. 13 has the true Grantha form. *Na* is of the open-mouthed variety with loops at the lower ends. *Ta* is of the looped variety. *Tha* has an open mouth of the circle type. *Dha* is roughly oblong. *Bha* opens out its triangular mouth, and the medial *u* and *ū* added to it are of the broad Pallava type. The medial *i* is also of the circle type. *La* extends its upper curve downwards. *Sha* optionally has the Grantha form, with a double loop at the right limb, and the triangle at the left of *sa* opens upwards. These features clearly relate this writing to the Grantha style of the Pallava inscriptions. The inscriptions may be placed in the eighth century A.D.

c16.s1.35

The origin of Ceylonese writing is traceable to the style of writing in India which was made popular by the activities of the Buddhists. The earliest inscriptions bear close affinity to the writing seen in the Nanaghat records and the cave inscriptions of the extreme south. In the next stage influence from the later Śātavāhana records is clearly traceable. In the third century A.D. the graphic style of the Ikshvāku records reached Ceylon. But side by side with these extraneous influences Ceylon maintained its conservative style of writing, in which survived the oldest forms seen in the island. The next influences reached Ceylon from the country of the Kadambas and the western coast. Finally, in the seventh to eighth century A.D., the Pallava Grantha writing penetrated into the island. Influences from these various styles were left behind in Ceylon, where a local conservative writing was gradually developing to meet the demand of the local language and phonetics.

c16.s1.36

Plate XIX

c16.s1.37

| I. | (i) Vessagiri cave inscriptions, except no. 12, *Ep. Zeylanica*, i. 18–21, pls. 5, 6. |
| | (ii) Ritigala cave inscriptions, ibid., pp. 144–6 and pl. 18. |
| | (iii) Keramba Hina cave inscription, ibid., p. 146 and pl. 19, top left. |
| | (iv) Naulpata alias Na-Arambadda-Hina cave inscription, ibid., p. 147 and pl. 19, top right. |

c16.s1.38

2. (i) Vessagiri cave inscription, rock B. cave no. 12, pl. 6, *Ep. Zeylanica*, i. 20.

c16.s1.39

3. (i) Vevala-tanna rock inscription, ibid., p. 152 and pl. 19.
(ii) Vevala-tanna cave inscription, ibid., p. 150 and pl. 19.

c16.s1.40

4. (i) Vessagiri rock inscription, ibid., p. 21 and pl. 7.
(ii) Naulpata rock inscription, ibid., p. 148, no. c and pl. 19.
(iii) Maha-Ratmale rock inscription, ibid., pp. 61–62, pl. 13 (*a*).

c16.s1.41

5. (i) Palu Makichava rock inscription of Gamini Abhaya, son of Maharaja Tisa and grandson of Vahaba, ibid., p. 211 and pl. 27.
(ii) Thuparam slab inscription of Gamini Abhaya, ibid. iii. 116 and pl. 7.
(iii) Two rock inscriptions at Viharegala, ibid., pp. 165–6 and pl. 13.

c16.s1.42

6. (i) Perumaiyan-kulam rock inscription, ibid. i. 69 and pl. 13 (*b*).
(ii) Jetavanarama inscription of Maharaja (Ma)ḷu Tisa, ibid., pp. 255–6 and pl. 30.
(iii) Vallipuram gold plate of Vasabha, ibid. iv. 237 and pl. 23.

c16.s1.43

7. (i) Tonigala rock inscription of Siri Meghavarṇṇa, son of Mahāsena, ibid. iii. 177–8 and pl. 14.
(ii) Timbirivava rock inscription of Meghavaṇa, son of Sirinaga, ibid. iv. 217 and pl. 22.
(iii) Vessagiriya rock inscription of Sirinaga, son of Tisa, ibid., pp. 221–2 and pl. 22.

Linked texts (7)

Kuccavēli Rock Inscription — Sanskrit
Maha-Ratmale Rock Inscription — Prakrit
Vallipuram Gold Plate Inscription — Sanskrit
Vessagiri
Tonigala rock inscription (version a) — Prakrit
Perumäiyaṇ-kuḷam rock-inscription (ed. Wickremasinghe 1912) — Prakrit
Vessagiri cave inscription (ed. Goldschmidt 1877) — Prakrit

Indian Palaeography c16.s1: Scope

Contents

Scope

Linked texts (7)