Epigraphia Indica Vol 11

Author(s): E Hultzsch
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

Page 61

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[Vol. XI.
8th, 11th and 14th days of both the fortnights of every month in the three towns named above and threatening with capital panishment those who killed or caused others to kill living beings. The Brāhmaga priests, ministers and others were also ordered to respect this edict of nonslaughter. And amongst these, he who commits the sin of taking life, should, it is stated, be fined five drammas, but if the sinner be one attached to the king, he should be fined one dramma only. Then comes the sign-manual of the personage who issued the edict, who is here called Mahārāja Sri-Albanadēva, followed by the approval of the great princes (maha-rajaputra) Këlhuņa and Gajasim ha. The edict was written by the thakkura Khēlāditya, minister for peace and war. Then we are informed, in a postscript, that this gift of safety to animals was caused to be proclaimed, with the permission of the king, by Pütiga and Sāliga, sons of Subhamkara, of the Porvād caste and residents of Nadulapura (Nádol). The inscription ends with the information that it was engraved by the sūtradhāra Bhāila. Pätigu and Såliga are no doubt the same individuals that had & similar edict promulgated through Girijādēvi, queen of Punapāksbadēva, a feudatory of Rayapāla and ruling over the province of Ratnapura, the southernmost district of Marwär.
It is worthy of note that the edict in question is to be made applicable to two distinct classes with varying degrees of rigour. The class to which it is to be applied with the greatest rigour is, of course, that of the merchants (mahājanas) and betel-sellers (tānbülikas), who doubtless must have, then as now, been Jainas and consequently supposed to be the greatest respecters of animal life. The class, with reference to which the rigour is relaxed, is that of the ministers and priests. Of the first of these we cannot be certain whether they were recruited froin the Brahmana caste. Bat the priests unquestionably can be no other than Brahmanas, and when they are asked to respect animal life, it is plain that some Brahmaņas of Marwar at any rate were then in the habit of eating flesh, which is now looked upon with abhorrence by them-due no doubt to the influence of Jainism which has been predominant in Rajputāna for the last six centuries, if not longer.
Next, the edict was to be in force at the three places, vis. Kirățakāpa, Lâțarhada, and Śiva, the towns which Albanadeva secured through the favour of Kumarapala. Kiratakupa is undoubtedly Kirādu, where the present inscription was found. It is mentioned twice in another inscription, in the same temple, dated V.E. 1235, and pertaining to the reign of the Chaulukya sovereiga, Bhimadeva. Lāțarbada must doubtless be the same as Lāțahrada, occurring in Bhinmal Inscriptions Nos. XI and XII, and Ratahrada in the Sandha bill inscription of Chácbigadēva. Professor Kielhorn, when he edited the last inscription, was unable to identify it. But, as suggested to me by Munshi Devi Prasad of Jodhpur, it must be identified with Räddhadā, which was the original name of the district round about Nagar-Gudhā in the Mallāņi province, Marwår. The third place is Sivå.-The full form of the name is unfortunately not preserved, but I have no doubt that it must have been some name corresponding to the modern Sheo, & town of antiquity and even now of some importance, and the head. quarters of a district of the same name.
TEXT. 1 t* Fa[CU] PPoc Haaf 88 0 [a] . . .
. . . . . . Fronfacroru2 WERDfaat (ETZAGAATU .
....farmialu]TTI
Bhavnagar Prakrit and Sanskrit Inscriptions, p. 206. From the original stone. • Expressed by a symbol.
. Read OUT