99 
1900.] A. F. R. Hoernle — EpigrapJdcal Note on Palm-leaf, etc. 
Table 
No. 
A.D. 
Date. 
Reference. 
Loc. 
Mat. 
Measure. 
1 
[450] 
Fragments, J. A. S. B. 
W. Ind. 
Cor. 
?x2 
2# 
[520] 
Horiuzi. 
W. Ind. 
Cor. 
11 X 2 to If 
3* 
[550] 
Add. 1702, Bendall. 
W. Ind. 
Cor. 
12x2 
4* 
859 
Harsa 252. 
Add. 1049, Bendall. 
W. Ind. 
Cor. 
16x2 
5* 
1008 
Nep. 128. 
Add. 866, Bendall. 
Nep. 
Cor. 
21x2 
6 
1014 
Nep. 134. 
No. 3828, Ind. Govt.- 
Nep. 
Cor. 
12f X 2i 
Y# 
1015 
Nep. 135. 
Pal. Soc., No. XXI. 
Nep. 
Cor. 
21 ^x 24 
1020 
5 Mahipala. 
Add. 1464, Bendall. 
Bih. 
Cor. 
21x2| 
1026 
Nep. 146. 
See No. 6 above. 
Cor. 
9 
1071 
Nep. 191. 
A 15, Mitra. 
Nep. 
Cor. 
22f x2f 
10 
1078 
Nep. 198. 
No. 3830, Ind. Govt. 
Nep. 
Cor. 
18xlf 
11# 
1084 
Nep. 204. 
Pal. Soc., No. XVII. 
Nep. 
Cor. 
12x2 
12 
1089 
Sam. 1145. 
No. 35, Kielhorn. 
W. Ind. 
Cor, 
25i X 2f 
13 
1090 
Sam. 1146. 
No. 36, do. 
W. Ind. 
Cor. 
25| X 2f 
^ About No. 6 see Journal, As. 8oc. Beng., Vol. LXII (1893), p. 252. The MS. 
has two dates; viz , N. S, 134 on the outside of the first written leaf, and N. S. 146 
in the colophon, on the last leaf. These are probably the dates of beginning and 
finishing the copy. There are similarly two dates on No. 50 ; viz., Laks. 374 and 9ak 
1423. As to No. 72 I may note that under No. 2126 of the “Notices” two manu- 
scripts are described. The Government manuscript is a Corypha MS., and is entered 
here in Table I. The other manuscript, which I have not seen, is entered in 
Table III, No. 128 ; and to judge from its measurements, it is a Borassus MS. The 
date of the Government manuscript, however, is galcdhdah 1 16 | I with a lacuna 
for the units and tens, which may mean 1600 as Dr. Mitra assumed ; but it may be 
also a later date. The measurements of Nos. 26 and 41 have been kindly verified for 
me by the Honorary Librarian of the Royal Asiatic Society. Some leaves of Nos 39 
and 42 are much narrower, viz., 32xl|(l) and 15xlf (1;J) respectively. The 
equation of the dates of the Laksmaniya Era has been made with 1105, the present 
year 1898 being = 793 L. E., and the 1st year of that era running from the 15 Jan., 
1106, to the 15th January, 1107. No. 65 is dated ^^^ka 1555 and San 1041. The 
latter date refers to the Fasli Era of Bengal, and is = 1633 A.D ; see Cunningham’s 
Booh of Indian Eras, p. 82. “ Pal. Soc ” refers to the Publications of the London 
Palaeographical Society. In the case of a few manuscripts, such as No. 17, 55, etc., 
the length is not given by me, because at the time I examined them, I forgot to 
take a note of it. 
