________________
246
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. IX.
the Journ. Roy. s. Soc. 1890, Plate to p. 6:9. Here the St. Andrew's cross has been entered as 40, and a sign much resembling the pta and another looped sign almost exactly like that of No. 12 as 70. I do not wish to throw any doubts on the correctness of these readings, but I contend that for such questions inscriptions must be treated separately according to time and locality.
Rajendralala Mitra, Dowson and Cunningham agreed in restoring the name of the king as Tarasya]. When I edited the inscription from the facsimiles published by my predecessors, I drew attention to the circumstance that the available space is hardly sufficient for the three aksharas dévasya, and I proposed to restore the name as Visushkasya, as this name of the king seemed to be attested by two other inscriptions of S. 76 and S. 78,1 whereas the first undoubted record of Vasudeva's reign was dated in S. 80. What I said about the difficulty of supplying three syllables is confirmed by the impression now before me, although owing to the frequent irregularity of the writing in these inscriptions it is impossible to speak on this point with absolute certainty. But the evidence for the existence of a king Vâsushka in S. 76 and S. 78 is not so strong as it seemed to be formerly. As I have tried to show above, the date of the Sanchi inscription mentioning a king Vasashka is quite uncertain, and the Mathurâ inscription mentioned by Führer as being dated in S. 76 and recording repairs in the reign of Vasushka has not yet been published. As Dr. Konow informs me, it cannot even be found now, Führer's trenches having been filled up again a long time ago and the exact spot where the inscription was found being no more known. Under these circumstances a decision is of course, impossible for the present. If Führer's statement after all should prove correct, I should unhesitatingly restore Visu to Vásushkasya, otherwise the reading Vasudevasya will have to be accepted.
The rest of the inscription calls for few remarks. Talakiya or Talaki seems to be the name of a locality, but I am unable to identify it. The title mahddandanayaka is frequent in the inscriptions of the Gupta period and later times. In the Kushana inscriptions it has not yet been found before, but the subordinate title of dandanayaka occurs in the Manikyâla inscription,3 where the correct reading in 1. 2 is, not Laladoḍa-nayago, but Lala-dadanayago.
III-MATHURA STONE INSCRIPTION OF THE TIME OF SONDASA.
This inscription was first published, together with a facsimile, in 1870 by Professor Dowson in the Journ. Roy. As. Soc. New Sor. Vol. V. p. 188, No. 29. In 1873 it was published again with a facsimile by Cunningham in the Arch. Surv. Rep. Vol. III. p. 30, No. 1. And in 1904 I have tried to edit the text from those two facsimiles in the Ind. Ant. Vol. XXXIII. p. 149, No. 24. For the present edition of the record I have made use of an impression found in Professor Hoernle's collection described above.
Cunningham states that the stone bearing the inscription was found in the Jail Mound at Mathura. According to Dowson, it has been cut through and the first part of it has been carried off. On the other hand, the facsimiles distinctly showed that something was missing at the right end, and thus I was led to suppose that the stone was damaged on both sides. This, however, is not the case. Nothing is missing at the beginning of the writing on the left, and on the right also only one letter has been cut off at the end of the first two lines. With this exception the inscription is in an excellent state of preservation.
1 Mathura inscription of 8. 76, mentioned by Führer, Progress Report for 1895-96; Sâñchi inscription of S. 78, edited by Bühler, Ep. Ind. Vol. II. p. 369 f.
2 This is the reading suggested by Dr. Fleet, Journ. Roy. As. Soc. 1903, p. 326, but he is himself inclined to look upon this form as a mere variant of Vâsushka, if the existence of such a name should be proved; see Journ. Roy. As. Soc. 1905, p. 357 f.
Journ. As. Ser. IX. Vel. VII. p. 8 f.
