________________
242
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
(VOL. IX.
The inscription is divided by a blank space into two parts. The upper portion, containing eight lines, is complete with the exception of some letters at the end of the first two lines, which have disappeared by the breaking off of the right corner of the stone. Of the lower portion which in Dowson's and Cunningham's facsimiles has been omitted altogether, nothing is left but faint traces of some characters in the first line. The characters are Brahmi of the Kushana type. The sha appears in the older form with the small cross-bar, but the subscript ya shows the cursive form. The language is the mixed dialect. The inscription is dated in the year 74 of a mahårája rå[jâtirêja] dévaputra whose name began with Vásu, but owing to its fragmentary state its real parport cannot be made out.
TEXT. 1 Maharajasyal r[a].......... 2 sya dvaputrasya Vásu.....! 3 savatsaro4 705 4 varsliam [A]-6 4 sê prathamé divasů 5 tris[6]? 30 asyam parvvayamo 6 Talakis[]mahadåņda7 niya kasyalı VA8 linns[y]al? 'k[shé]t[râ]13 Mihi9 .......... (mahâdayda].
REMARKS. 1 The 1-stroke is distinctly visible in the impression, although it does not appear in Capt. Watts' eye-copy-2 Tho dl-stroke is uncertain. Restore rijdtiraja--3 The a-stroke is quite distinct, thongh here again it is omitted in Capt. Watts' eye-copy. As regards the restoring of the line, I refer to the remarks below.-4 The 6-stroke, omitted in Capt. Watts' eye-copy, is quite distinct. -5 Owing to a flaw in the stone, a small portion of the lower left cross-bar of the symbol has disappeared. In the impression somebody has tried to restore the missing portion by adding in pencil a hook turning upwards, but there is nothing to warrant this restoration. There can be no doubt that the symbol had the shape of a plain St. Andrew's cross, just as in other inscriptions. The lower right cross-bar also has been pencilled over in the impression, but this is of no consequence as it is perfectly distinct. The meaning of the symbol will be discussed below.
- The upper portion of the m and the à are not quite distinct.-7 The ê-stroke is indistinct, and the sa has suffered from a hole in the paper. -8 The apparent curving of the tail of the a has been cansed by pencilling. In Capt. Watts' eye-copy the tail is quite straight.-9 Above the pu there is a distinct stroke which must be accidental.-10 There are some strokes behind and below the ta, but they are not noticed in Capt. Watts' eye-copy and may be accidental. The 6-stroke is not very distinct, and the reading Talukiyan would be possible.-11 Capt. Watts expressly states that there are no traces of letters before the ni of line 7 and the li of line 8. The ni has been pencillod over so as to look almost like sı, but there can be no doubt that it is nul, and as such it appears also in Capt. Watts' eye-copy.-12. The ya is damaged, but certain 13 The ksle of the first and the r of the second syllable are damaged, but certain. The é of ksha is very faint and not given in Capt. Watts' eye-copy. The last syllable may also be tro as in Capt Watts' eye-copy-14 Of this word only faint traces are visible in the impression, and the reading rests almost entirely on Capt. Watts' eye-copy. Instead of da Capt. Watts gives då.
TRANSLATION. In the year 74 of the mahardja rijatirija déraputra Vásu......., in the first month of the rainy season, on the thirtieth day, 30,-on that (date specified as) above, in the field (P) of the great general Valina at Talakiya (or Talaki?) Mihi......
