________________
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA,
paraprashamdasa 15 pi cha upakaroti (.] Tada) añatha ka[rata] [cha]" a(ta)pra[shandam]
L. 5-chhanati parap(ra)shadasa cha apakaroti [] Yo hi kochi ataprash(a)dam pujeti (para)p(ra)sh(a)d(a) [ga]rahati savr(a)" atap(ra)shadabhatiyevaa kiti [?]
L. 6—(a)taprashamdam dipaya(mi) ti [] so cha puna tatha karaṁtam so cha puna tatha kar(amtam)" ba(dha)tara (m)" upahamti atapra (sha)dam [.] So sayamo vol s(a)dhu [] kiti [?] añam(a)ñasa dhramo
L. 7--$(r)uņeyuo cha su(f) rus(e)yu cha ti (.] Evam (hi) d(e)vanam priyasa ichh [] kiti [?] savraprashamda bahuśruta cha kala na gama cha siy(a)su (.) Ye cha tatra tatraso
L. 8-prasana tesham, vatavo [:] de(va) nam pri[yo) n(a tatha da)naṁ va (pu)ja va m(a)ñati ya(tha) kiti [P] salavadhi siya ti savraprashadanam bahuka cha[.] Etaye
L. 9-vapata [dhra]mamahamatra" (i) * . yachhama (hama)tra v(a)chabhumika añe cha nikay(a)" 1.1 Imam) cha etisa (pha)lam yam ataprashadavadhi”
L. 10-dhrama(sa) cha dipana“[.]
IN DEVANAGARI. 1. देवनं प्रियो प्रियदशि रय सवप्रषंडनि ग्रहठनि च पुजेति दनेन विविधये च पुजये। नो चु तथ दनं व पुज व
2. देवनं प्रियी मअति यथ किति। सलवढि सिय सवप्रषंडनं। सलवढि तु बहुविध। तस तु यो मुल यं वचगुति।
15 The ra of para shows a small slanting line attached below to the right of the letter. The apparent anusvåra under da is shown by the impression to be an accidental scratch.
14 The last sign of karata is almost entirely gone. The reading may have been kararhtar. 17 The letter is very doubtful. One would expect chu or tu. In the following word the two anuadras are doubtful. 19 Possibly 'pashadasa.
The o of kochi is visible on the reverse of the impression.
Possibly pashandan, SI Possibly savre. 2 The e-stroke to the left of ya, where its proper position is, seems a little abnormal, and may be an accidental
scratch.
* The participial phrase has been repeated by mistake. The first apusvars of the second karartar is doubtful. # The anusodra seems certain from the impression.
* This seems plain on the impression, but is a mistake for ea. It looks as if a ra-stroke were attached to sa of sadku.
» Dhra is perfectly distinct on the impression,
17 This might be read also eruniyu. Bat there are some other cases where a diagonal stroke passes through the inside of the semicircle at the top of pa.
* The top line of oru is not distinct owing to a large fissure.
As the top of na has been destroyed, it may have been dental. * The last three syllables are not visible on the impression. 31 The anusuara is distinct on the impression. * The final vowel is distinct on the impression. » Va looks on the facsimile like vya. The impression shows that the lower lines are scratches.
Read athaye. The last three letters on the facsimile are not visible on the impression. * Dhra is mutilated. Ha is perfectly distinct on the photograph; tra on the same and on the impression. » Probably ithidhiyachha to be restored. » The apparent 6-stroke to the left of ya is, I think, an accidental scratch. 28 Possibly imo.
* A line slanting upwards seems to be attached to the left of the lower end of the initial a. But it may be due to a fissure, the prolongation of which is plain on the impression.
• This line is not on the impression.
