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 181

138
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
(VOL. IX.
A few further points remain to be noticed. (1) In ateürena and hórakáparivárena (A. 9 and 10) we find a perhaps iutentional stroke diverging from the tail of the na, though not in both cases on the same side. Have we here na ? The rather noticeable variations in the form of the nasal may be observed in Plate iv.
(2) Sa varies between the forms with and without vne small adjunct near the centre (see Plate iv). In N. 3 the addition of the T-stroke makes sum. In E. 4 a slight curve at the foot may also indicate sam, anticipating. as in the Stein documents, the following nasal. A writing sya is certainly to be seen in G. 1 and probably also in B. 2.
(3) The two occurrences of kharaðsta (A. 4 and E. 1) seem both to show a small diverging mark in the place where h is usually appended, & circumstance which, together with the probable derivation of the word, suggests & reading Tha=hra.
(4) In A. 2 a has a small stroke added as a sort of head.
(5) In A. 13 we have the distinguishing mark of é vertical and at the top; elsewhere it is horizontal and at the centre.
(6) The sê of A. 11 has two small (head and foot) strokes differentiating it from the cd of the previous line, apparently without reason.
(17) The complicated jo of C: 2 recalls the varieties on the coins (see Gardner, The Coins of Bactria, pp. 55, 83).
(8) Lastly we may mention that the stone presents a number of dots and other small marks which must apparently be ascribed to accident or wear. In some cases we might be tempted to trace the anusvára, e.g. in J., where we should thus arrive at & reading Sarvástivátainan.
The Prakrit in which the inscriptions are composed has been described by Bühler and perhaps need not be discussed at length. It is distinguished by closeness to Sanskrit. Elision of medial consonants occurs, if we neglect the suffixal k (nagaraa, kusülaa, máhásárghia), only in ateürena (for puréna ?), sašpa[t]. In ayaria and puya (=úcharya and púja) we have a weakening of ch to y. I have suggested (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1906, p. 205) that the sound denoted by this y was that of the French j, and the matter will arise again in connection with the proper names. The changes apparent in the word chhatrava are not necessarily Indian. The hardening of g and d to kr and t has been already dealt with ; on the other hand p appears in thúva and pratithavitó as v, never b as p. Conjunct & is, except in foreiga and technical names (kharaðsta, sakastana, sarvástivada), assimilated ([t]thava, kadhavára, prati[i] thárita, bhi[k]khu); T, on the other hand, remains both as prior (sarva, khardaa), and as posterior, member of a conjunction. The forms of the a and a declensions are very well preserved. The nominative sing. masc. appears both as a (in thúva, etc.) and aso (kharaðstó, etc.); the neuter is in a[m] (barira[mm]), the genitive singular in [8]sa, twice written sya. In-munisa the i declension shows the Prakpit form; of the i inflexion we have several forms (instrumental-id, etc.). Ther-stems seem to be regular (dhite in A 3 being a miswriting for dhitrá), while in yuvaraña[1] in A. 4 we have an ultra-Sanskrit use of the consonant paradigm. We may note the employment of sarudstivada in place of ovddin. The only pronouns occurring are imó, nominative masculine, and it, a locative, and the only finite verb bhusavi (oertainly not bhasati, as Bühler read) presents a problem ; see the note to A. 13. The false concord farira pratifhävitó is found else where (see the note ad loc.).
We now come to the historical matter, which has been discussed both by Bühler, pp. 529-33, and by Professor Rapson (p. 541 ff. of the same volume). The object of the chief inscription (A.) is to record a religious donation on the part of the Chief Queen of the Satrap Hájúla, with whom are associated various members of her family and her whole court. In the other inscriptions we find honourable mention of (1) certain other members of the Satrap family at Mathura, (2) other Satraps, and (3) a Buddhist teacher, or two Buddhist teachers, bearing the