________________
132 EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XIV. - parivarena, etena and Budhilena. Against the role is nana, where however the reading as well as the interpretation are extremely doubtful, and farther apanage, taena, kulalamulena and sachha[?] sana. I do not think that these few exceptions in any way invalidate the rule, at least if we bear in mind what has been said about the way in which old inscriptions were engraved. The two short Kbaroshthi records from Manikiāla published by Mr. Pargiterl have no instance of the dental n, and the perebral only occurs, in accordance with the general rule, between vowels.
The Shakardarra inscription of Sarn. 40 has n in nikame and always between vowels.
In the Āra inscription - only occurs between vowels and is always cerebral with the exception of the dental n in Kanishkasa.
The Wardak vase inscription of Sar. 51 is of the same kind as the Taxila inscription of Sam. 136, being used throughout, even when it is initial.
The Ohind inscription of Sam. 61, on the other hand, uses only ".
N is always cerebral and occurs only between vowels in the Lahore Museum inscription of Sam. 68, the Jhaoli copper plate inscription, and some minor records, such as the inscriptions on the Lahore image No. 206, the Chārsada pedestal, the Swat Buddha statuette of Buddhamitra and Buddharachhita, and the Swát bas-relief of Simhamitra. In the Palatu Dhéri pedestal inscription, on the other hand, we find n alone used, and, so far as I can judge, that is also the case in the inscriptions in the Kanishka stūpa, though I am not certain about the word which Dr. Spooner reads as navakarmi.
It will be seen that the most serious exception to the rule is the inscription on the Mathură capital, and I think that even this exception can be satisfactorily explained. I hope to have shown that the old language of the Sakas and the Kushanas was of the same kind as the old Iranian tongue spoken in ancient Khotan, and here the cerebral ► occurs only as a secondary development of an old dental combined with some other consonant. It is therefore quite natural that the Sakas who engraved the Mathurā inscription were influenced by the phonetic features of their own language. The form Kanishka in the Āra inscription must be explained in the same way. This name is certainly not Indian, but was coined in accordance with the rules of the old language of the Kushaņas. Its n must therefore originally have been dental, and, if it is often written as a cerebral in Indian records, that is due to the influence of the Indian dialect adopted by the Kushanas.
I think we have to infer from a consideration of the entire material at our disposal that the old Aryan language which is used in the Kharoshthi inscriptions did in fact distinguish the dental and the cerebral n in the same way as the Kharoshthi manuscript of the Dhammapada. Though we have no certain instances of a doubled - betweep vowels, we can safely assume that every initial n and every compound between vowels was dental, while every single between yowels became cerebralized. The few exceptions can be explained through the phoneti cal tendencies of the Indo-Scythians themselves, through the influence of Sanskrit, and through the ignorance of the masons and sometimes also of the scribes. At all events, I think I am justified in transliterating the two letters in accordance with Professor Bühler's table and the state of things in the Dhammapada manuscript. .
The reading and interpretation of the inscription still present many difficulties, and it will be necessary to make some additional remarks.
In 1. 1 the only crux is the last word, which Mr. Banerji reads pathadarasa, Professor. Lüders kaïsarasa, while Dr. Fleet remarks that the only oertain akshara of the whole word is the last one. Mr. Gupte states that the reading kaïsarasa seems to be the right one. The first
* Ep. Ind., Vol. XII, pp. 299 f.
Sitrungsberichte, 1016, pp. 787 #.
