________________
208
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XI.
This rule applied also to t1, thus padiyamsam-vaṭiyamsam (11. 2, 3 C) for which see rule 6. Only one case of medial ch occurs, namely, socha (1. 2), and there the rule did not hold good if socha Skt. saucha (but see rule 4). The rule probably applied to aspirated tenues, but no instance occurs.
As mentioned above, an original t in verbal terminations remains unchanged; thus we find paridhabēti (1. 1) and bhavatu (11. 2, 3).
Rule 2.-Rule 1 applied also where an original medial t was compounded with r-thus pudra-putra (1. 1), and midra=mitra (1. 2). The akshara in these words is clearly dr and not t or tr, for it has exactly the form of d (as in dachhinae, 1. 3 A) with the 7 stroke, and there is no instance here where an undoubted t approximates to d in shape as it appears to do at times on the Lion-capital. But t combined with any other consonant was not softened, e.g., amtara= antara (1. 3 A), and see note on arupyata (p. 217). The ț in Arṭamisiyasa (1. 1) remains unchanged, but this is a Greek word.
Rule 3.-Consequently in reading this inscription it must be noted that, where a media or soft consonant occurs as a non-initial, it may represent an original media or (since consonants are never written double here) a doubled media, or the corresponding tenuis; thus d can represent original d or dd or t, and similarly g and b. So d=original d in sada (1.3 B), and= original t in mada (1. 2), and b=bb in bhradaba which bhrātabba.
Rule 4-Where a tenuis or hard consonant appears here singly (or combined with r or v) and as a non-initial (except t in verbal terminations), it represents a doubled letter, for otherwise it would have been modified according to rule 1. Thus as regards t, natigra=nattigra= nattika (by rule 1), and sambhatigra sambhattigra sambhattika (1. 2); satva sattva (1. 3 A); and arupyata aripyatta (1.3 B). Socha would follow this rule if we read sochcha a possible Skt. form fauchya, but see rule 1. So also in the case of aspirated tenues; thus, dachhinaë= dachchhinde (1. 3 A), and saphatiga sapphattiga (1. 3 B).
Rule 5.-Conjunct y appears only where respect required the full form of the word, as in the personal names whether in the nominative or in the genitive case, Kamagulya (1. 1), Maregrasya (11. 1, 2), Hōveshkasya (1. 2), and Mityagasya (1.3 C); and in the special term arupyata in a quotation (1. 3 B). Elsewhere it is assimilated, as in Arṭamisiyas(s)a (1. 1), and bhradaba (1. 2) which bhratabba (by rule 3)=Skt. bhratṛivya (vy turning to bb as in kabba and
1 Pischel's Prakrit Grammar, § 198.
* Ibid. §§ 192, 200.
E.I. ix, plate IV at p. 146. Having regard to the forms used there, Dr. Thomas thinks that this letter dr is t, but there appear to me to be grave objections thereto. First, as handwritings varied, each writing must primarily be scrutinized by itself as urged in p. 203, note 1; here the writing is minute, neat and well-formed, so that the presumption is that the differences between characters were made deliberately and have their special significance. Secondly, t proper appears in the words paryata, amtara, and arupyata (11. 3 A and B), as well as in paridhaběti (1. 1), rajatibaja (1. 2) and faphatiga (1. 3 B); and if this character dr is really t also, then t is made in two ways markedly different, and moreover without any reason, as we see especially in the compound words natigra-midra-sambhatigrana, where there was no reason to write the dr in midra different from the t in the two other words, if they are all alike t. Thirdly, if this dr is t, all distinction between t, tr and dr would be obliterated, a conclusion that seems to me highly improbable, considering how important and significant these three letters t, d and rare in the different kinds of Prakrit. Fourthly, Sanskrit t medial and uncompounded is certainly changed to d in this Prikrit as shown under Rule 1, and the same change would be natural when t is compounded with which is only a liquid, so that we should by analogy expect the t in Sanskrit putra and mitra to appear here as d. My readings of the three characters as t (as in the words cited above), tr (as in avashatri, 1. 3 C) and dr (as in pudra, midra and adra) give each character a consistent value throughout, a value which accords fully with definite phonetic changes; whereas, if we read all these characters as t, we should have three different forms for t (with none apparently for tr or dr) and this Prakrit would become chaotic in its modifications. The confusion would be still further increased, if the letter which I read aa d (see p. 204) be treated as a fourth form of t.
