Vol. VII, No. 6.] The Evidence of the Faridpur Grants. 291 
[N.S.] 
Grant of Kumiragupta I.! In all nb ae eight instances 
of the use of this form of Ha in this pla 
Brhaccatia in line 4. ie: in line 10. 
Icchaimyahatn i. tat sn 5° eee, ae 
pai ts We. Ee Steg ee 
Grhitv sy 59) Oe yy eee 
In all other cases we find that the ae of the cases variety 
of the Gupta alphabet in use with its 6th century addition 
of an acute angle. We have in all eight cases of its use :— 
Maharajadhiraja in line 2. Matapitroranugraha in line 19. 
a} 2, H 24. 
Maharaja 350099 . aret oe) 35 
Mahattara >> o>» & Himasena poy) Os 
Tadarhatha co” Se ne eee 
In a previous paper I have already noticed that the early 
Gupta forms were gradually dying out of i Eastern alphabet 
about the middle of the 5th century A.D., so itis not likely 
that they should occur with such Foie in 7th or Sth 
century inscriptions.’ 
his discrepancy is still more remarkable, as the scribe 
has used the different forms in writing the same word; for 
example, compare the word Himasena in line 23 and line 
5 and the word Anugraha in lines 18 and 19. It should be 
noticed in this connection that the form of Ha of tlhe Eastern 
variety to be found in this inscription is somewhat different 
from that to be found in the three inscriptions cited above. In 
fact, it is difficult to make out whether the letter is a Ra of the 
form, which is to be found in the Eastern variety of the early 
Gupta alphabet, has been used, but in the majority of cases 
the form of the Western variety is to be found. Thus we find 
the earlier form in six cases :-— 
Labdha in line 2. Labhah in line 13. 
Kalasakha », lines 5-6, Sarnkalpabhih ct ee 
Durllabha », line 6. Stlakundasca ,, ,, 24. 
but the form of Western variety is found in all other cases :— 
Kulacandra in line 4. Dhruvilatyam in line 16. 
Aluka cit ps Kulya Bg ae 
Kulasvami eee Kala co: AB: 
Miulyam sags. © Salanga oh pets | 
Pustapala po ga Uparilikhita ,, ,, 20. 
Kulya iy ak: Anupalaicha ,, ,, 21. 
1 Ibid., vol. v, p. 459 
2 Ibid., p. 460; cf. also Bloch in Arch. Survey Report, 1903-4, p. 102. 
