________________
No. 27.) SEVEN BRAHMI INSCRIPTIONS FROM MATHURA AND ITS VICINITY. 209
and I therefore consider it more probable that pu was at first omitted by mistake and afterwards inserted below the line. As the second akshara certainly had a subscript ra and the third akshara is na, the reading shaputrena naturally suggests itself, and although the upper portion of the second akshara is very indistinct, the reading would not seem to be impossible. The fourth akshara of the line is ka with the ordinary o-sign at the top and another very distinct horizontal line to the left. The next akshara is sa. From the reverse of the inscription it appears that of the two strokes visible at the top of the letter the one to the left is accidental, whereas the stroke on the right seems to be the s-sign. Perhaps the two aksharas are to be read Kausi and the word to be restored 88 Kaufikāpatrena. (5) The missing aksharas were restored by Chanda. (6) The missing portion of the compound mahāsthāna .... can hardly be restored with any certainty. At the end of the line I would supply sai. Other possibilities are discussed below. (7) Chanda restores vedikak (which seems to be a misprint for vedikā) prati, but the additional cha is indispensable. (8) The o-sign of to is distinct, but to must be a mistake for either te or tāni. (9) Chanda wrongly restores bhavatu instead of bhagavān. (10) The missing aksharas were restored by Chanda. (11) Something like aišvaryan or ayurbalam is to be supplied at the end of the line. (12) Chanda read at first samvartayatan and afterwards saņvartfelyātam. The third akshara is undoubtedly rta, not rte, the last akshara is tāṁ, and the reverse of the impression shows clearly that the supposed ā-sign of ya is only a flaw in the stone.
TRANSLATION. .. by Vasu, a gateway of stone (?) and the railing was erected at the....of the great temple of bhagavat Vasudeva. May bhagavat Vāsudeva, being pleased, promote (the dominion or the life and strength) of svāmin mahākshatrapa Sodāsa.
REMARKS. Owing to the extreme uncertainty of the reading, the first five lines of the inscription cannot be translated. As stated above, from the few letters legible in the first two lines it becomes probable that the inscription was dated in the reign of svāmin mahākshatrapa Sodāsa, and this is borne out not only by palæography, but also by the benediction pronounced on the mahākshatrapa in the conclusion. The genealogy of the donor is hopelessly fragmentary. Not a single name can be relied upon, and it is not even quite sure whether the dopor's own name was simply Vasu or & compound name ending in -vasu. Only so much seems to be certain that he was not a foreigner, but a Hindu.
The gift consisted of a gateway (torana) and a railing (vedikā) and perhaps a third object the name of which ended in -la. Chanda restored lan as chatuhsālam which is highly improbable As this term never occurs in inscriptions of this time. Possibly lar is the rest of devakulan used here in the sense of a small shrine as in the Jaina inscription No. 78, or, more probably, lam is to be restored as sailar. If the language of the record were quite correct Sanskrit, the predicate would be either pratishthāpitāni or pratishthā pite. The form actually found in 1. 9, (prati)shthāpito, is wrong in any case and therefore of no account for the restoration of the subject of the sentence.
The name of the place where the torana and the vedikā are said to have been erected, is mutilated and cannot be restored, especially because it is doubtful whether one or three syllables are lost after mahästhāna. But whatever the missing syllables may bave been, I cannot follow Chanda in taking the terms the great place of bhagavat Vasudeva ' as meaning a spot that was believed to have been either the birthplace of Krishna or the scene of some notable event in his early career.
1 Chanda translates vedika by's square terrace in the middle of the courtyard', but the meaning 'railing' is absolutely certain.
