Epigraphia Indica Vol 09

SR No.: 032563
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: E Hultzsch, Sten Konow
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1907
Total Pages: 498
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 28 MB

Page 177

186
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. IX.
While endorsing in the main these statements of so great an authority, from all points of view, as the lato Prof. Bühler, I have endeavoured, in re-editing the inscriptions with Plates, which before were wanting, to give an unbiased reading based upon new impressions supplied by the kindness of the Department in the Museum (at the instance of Dr. J. F. Fleet, who originated the suggestion of this article), and upon frequent inspections of the stone itself. The present versions will therefore be found to differ in some particulars from those of Dr. Bhagvanlal and Prof. Bühler.
The shape and dimensions of the capital will be best realized from the accompanying Plates; but some particulars demand a verbal description. In the first place, the circular hole in the upper square surface, corresponding to a similar hole in the under surface, proves that the capital was surmounted by a shaft or some other continuation. Prof. Bühler remarks that various representations on slabs from the Amaravati Stûpa prove this shaft to have supported a Dharmachakra, referring to the Archæological Survey Plates published by Dr. Burgess (Plate xxxviii. figs. I and 6, and Plate xl. figs. 3 and 4). But it has already been pointed out by me in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society for 1906, pp. 216 and 464, that the use of lion-capitals of actual pillars was a common feature in Indian architecture, derived from Persian models. Examples may be seen in the Archaeological Survey publications relating to Bharhut (Cunningham, Plates vi., viii., .), Sanchi (Maisey, Plates xix., xxxii.), Mathura (V. A. Smith, Plates xliii. xlvi. and xlix.-l.), Amaravati (Burgess, p. 93, Plates xlix., liii., liv., lv., and Burgess, 1882, Plate xiv.), and elsewhere. The presumption, therefore, is that the lion-capital formed the crown of a real pillar.
Secondly, the state of the stone has been somewhat impaired by time and accident. In some cases, e.g. in the loss of the horn-like projections of the two heads, this has involved no curtailment of the text. The chippings at the two bottom corners have been, no doubt, equally harmless. But the front, which would be the most exposed portion of the stone, has in part so peeled away as to render some characters illegible. In the second line of the large inscription carved on the body of the lion to the spectator's left (J. 1. 1) the large rua is followed by traces of two or three aksharas of equal size leading to a partly visible sa (?), after which intervene three doubtful characters before we come to firm ground again ia puli.!
In size the aksharas vary considerably. We may distinguish five groups: (1) the inscriptions B. E. F. I. J. M. on the front and back of the stone (among which I. perhaps oxceeds the others slightly in size), having characters about 2-2 in. in height; (2) G. N. P. E", on the back and under surface of the stone, circa 2-1} in. ; (3) A. (on the unpolished top and back of the stone), K. L. (on the breast of the left lion), 0. Q. R. (underneath), J'. (front, on the leg of the left lion), circa 14 in. ; (4) C. D. E'. (which may be estimated from E., slightly the largest, visible among the characters of E.), circa 1 in. ; (5) H. H'., slightly incised in small characters, of about 4 in., at the places indicated on the front. In the same inscription the aksharas generally maintain a fair average size, but sometimes they become a little cramped by limitations of space. It is clear that the inscriptions in the larger characters (1), (2) and (3) were carved first, and those of a smaller size were afterwards crammed in wherever space offered.
In type, on the other hand, the characters present an uniformity which, like the subjectmatter of the records, forbids any supposition of additions during the subsequent history of the stone. They have been compared by Prof. Bühler to those of the Shahbâzgarhi and Mansehra versions of tho Edicts of Asoka. But the degree of similarity and dissimilarity may now be more exactly estimated from Bühler's Indian Palcography, where the columns viii. and ix.
1 In quoting Kharðshthi records, length of vowels is noted except where the intention is to ipsist upon the exact reading supplied by the original in question.