It's written in a script which didn't exist yet in the 3rd/4th century, which seems to rather disprove the earliest 224-383 dates, unless people want to argue that this script was in use hundreds of years before we thought it was.<p>It does seem to fit fairly well with the 680-779 dates, which also fits with when the 0 symbol started being used. 885-993 seems a bit too late, though not strictly impossible.<p>I'm a bit confused why the 224-383 date is even offered as a serious possibility by the researchers, because to me (admittedly as a non-expert) they seem highly unlikely and should have been dismissed as a fluke. This seems more driven by sensationalism and/or nationalism than anything else.