Book Title: Epigraphia Indica Vol 09
Author(s): E Hultzsch, Sten Konow
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

View full book text
Previous | Next

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.

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498