104 A. F. R. Hoernle — Epigraphical Note on Palm-leaf, etc. [No. 2, 
No. 
A.D. 
Eeference. 
Loo. 
Mat. 
Measure. 
24 
1650 
No. 1060, Bhandarkar. 
S. Ind. 
Cor. 
19|x2| 
25 
1650 
No. 9710, Tanjore. 
S. Ind. 
Cor. 
13|x2 
26 
1650 
No. 9908 do. 
S. Ind. 
Cor. 
18ix2i 
27 
1650 
No. 9066 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
16 X 11(B) 
28 
1650 
No. 9185 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
15 xIHB) 
29 
1650 
No. 9760 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
15ixl^V(B) 
30 
1650 
No. 9076 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
15|xl| (B) 
31* 
1670 
No. 9531 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
19|xl*(B) 
32 
1700 
No. 989, Bhandarkar. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
13|xH 
33 
1700 
No. 9169, Tanjore. 
S. Ind. 
Cor. 
16 x2|(B) 
34 
1700 
No. 9605 do 
S. Ind. 
^ Cor. 
12 xlii 
35 
1700 
No. 9870 do. 
S. Ind. 
Cor. 
14 X 2 
36 
1700 
No. 9960 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
15|x1-jV(B) 
37 
1700 
No. 9935 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
16fxi|(B) 
38 
1700 
No. 10910 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
14fxl*(B) 
39 
1720 
No. 8974 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
18Jxl (B) 
40 
1720 
No. 10868 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
l7ixl|to 1 t:V(B) 
41 
1750 
No. 9098 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
14§x1tV{B) 
42 
1750 
No. 9739 do. 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
12fxl^ (B) 
43 
1750 
No. 10786 do. I 
S. Ind. 
Bor. 
16fxlA(B) 
In the following remarks my arguments will be based entirely on 
the information furnished by Table I. The information of Table II 
will be used only as subsidiary and corroborative evidence. 
Further, for the present, my remarks will be limited entirely to the 
conditions obtaining in Northern India, ^.e., broadly speaking North of 
the 20th degree of latitude. The case of Southern India will be 
considered later on. 
The first point, very clearly brought out by Table I, is the exclu- 
sive use of Corypha leaves throughout Northern India, up to the latter 
part of the 17th century A.D. A very marked change begins with 
1675 A.D. Before that date (with one exception, No. 60, which I shall 
