DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.36954#0173
it surely was not Navasurendradityanandin who proclaimed it.
The Hatun rock inscription of Navasurendradityanandin shows a
comparatively late state of development of the Proto-Sarada
script, e.g. the letter has always the modern shape while
the old form of ^ is still preserved in several Proto-Sarada
mss.^. Other Gilgit mss. show a transitional state in which the
two forms appear side by side, ory% is written with a loop ^5^.
From the palaeographical point of view the Proto-Sarada was
most probably introduced into this region not much before the
beginning of the seventh century A.D., a time when the Brahmi
of the northern part of the peninsula became remarkably uniform
(DANI 1963; 109). But Navasurendradityanandin could not have
ruled at this time, even according to O. von HINUBER's very
early date for his reign (v. HINUBER 1982: 63). However, the
local scribes and copyists trained in writing the calligraphic
ornate script had to learn how to write the Proto-Sarada which is
quite different from the calligraphic ornate type. At the beginning
both types of script may have existed side by side. O. von HIN-
UBER was able to prove that one ms. of the Samghatasutra
written in the calligraphic ornate script was directly transcribed
into a Proto-Sarada copy (v. HINUBER 1982: 52f.). Later on,
the calligraphic ornate type may have gone completely out of
use. Some perhaps early examples from Gilgit, Bamiyan, and
Qizil written in Proto-Sarada show remarkable traces of the old
habit of embellishing the %%s%ms with knots, as is clearly shown
on the two folios published by S. LEVI (1932: 1—45), one No.
6b with a fragment from the Sangitiparyaya, and the other No.
5 Cf. SANDER 1968, alphabet PI. 22—26. — Compared with the $arada
inscription from Hund (Ep.Ind. XXI: 97—98) the Hatun inscription (Ep.
Ind. XXX: 226—31) of Navasurendradityanandin shows some letters less
developed, as Ma and the diacritic signs for 4 and -o. The Hund inscrip-
tion is dated 168/169 of an unknown era, according to the Harsa era
774/775 A.D. Following J.Ph. VOGEL's chronology the earliest ^arada
documents cannot be dated much before the middle of the ninth century
(1911: 46f.). According to it the Hund inscription should be dated one
century later. But the chronology of the ^arada script is far from being
certain, and still open to speculations. The script on the Kashmir bronze
published by PAL (1975, No. 31) shows nearly the same stage of develop-
ment as the script of the Hatun inscription.
Ill
The Hatun rock inscription of Navasurendradityanandin shows a
comparatively late state of development of the Proto-Sarada
script, e.g. the letter has always the modern shape while
the old form of ^ is still preserved in several Proto-Sarada
mss.^. Other Gilgit mss. show a transitional state in which the
two forms appear side by side, ory% is written with a loop ^5^.
From the palaeographical point of view the Proto-Sarada was
most probably introduced into this region not much before the
beginning of the seventh century A.D., a time when the Brahmi
of the northern part of the peninsula became remarkably uniform
(DANI 1963; 109). But Navasurendradityanandin could not have
ruled at this time, even according to O. von HINUBER's very
early date for his reign (v. HINUBER 1982: 63). However, the
local scribes and copyists trained in writing the calligraphic
ornate script had to learn how to write the Proto-Sarada which is
quite different from the calligraphic ornate type. At the beginning
both types of script may have existed side by side. O. von HIN-
UBER was able to prove that one ms. of the Samghatasutra
written in the calligraphic ornate script was directly transcribed
into a Proto-Sarada copy (v. HINUBER 1982: 52f.). Later on,
the calligraphic ornate type may have gone completely out of
use. Some perhaps early examples from Gilgit, Bamiyan, and
Qizil written in Proto-Sarada show remarkable traces of the old
habit of embellishing the %%s%ms with knots, as is clearly shown
on the two folios published by S. LEVI (1932: 1—45), one No.
6b with a fragment from the Sangitiparyaya, and the other No.
5 Cf. SANDER 1968, alphabet PI. 22—26. — Compared with the $arada
inscription from Hund (Ep.Ind. XXI: 97—98) the Hatun inscription (Ep.
Ind. XXX: 226—31) of Navasurendradityanandin shows some letters less
developed, as Ma and the diacritic signs for 4 and -o. The Hund inscrip-
tion is dated 168/169 of an unknown era, according to the Harsa era
774/775 A.D. Following J.Ph. VOGEL's chronology the earliest ^arada
documents cannot be dated much before the middle of the ninth century
(1911: 46f.). According to it the Hund inscription should be dated one
century later. But the chronology of the ^arada script is far from being
certain, and still open to speculations. The script on the Kashmir bronze
published by PAL (1975, No. 31) shows nearly the same stage of develop-
ment as the script of the Hatun inscription.
Ill