________________
No. 36.)
DHARANIKOTA DHARMACHAKRA PILLAR INSCRIPTION.
259
cription of Amaravati referred to above, while the date portion is oompletely lost except the only word savachhara, the name of the ruler is fully preserved, and it is the king Väsithiputa (Väsishthiputra) Pulumävi. Judging from the proximity of the two localities Amaravati and Dharaniköta, the resemblance between the scripts of the two records and the high regnal year, it seems very likely that the present record also referred itself to the reign of the very same Andhra king Pulumāvi of the Sātavāhana dynasty. The latest known regnal year of this monarch is twentyfour. If the reading panatrise proposed in the present record be correct, then we have to conclude that Pulumāvi's reign extended over at least thirty-four years. The inscription contains the numerals 1 and 6 in 1. 3 and 1.'2 respectively.
TEXT. 1 .. ... ........... chhara 2 pana .......... 6 divasa 3 prathame 1 ........ 'ka-kotubikasa 4 Khadanagasa a' .. [i]kena Agaloka kena Virkha..sa 5 putena amachena 6 Ataporena Dhanakadasa Mahāvihäre puva-dāre pava7 jitāna bhikhu-saghasa Puvasel[1]yana nigāyasa 8 parigabe dhamachaka-dhayo pațițhapito sava-loka9 satva-hita-Bukhāya11
Sec Rapson's Catalogue of the Coins of the Andhra Dynasty, etc., p. XXXVII. • Ibid., p. LXVI, where Puranic lists of Andhra kings are given. It will be seen there that No. 15 Palomavi, according to the Matsyapurana, ruled for 36 years and No. 24 Puloma for 28 years.
From ink impressions.
• Restore the word as savachhara (samvatsara). The preceding portion, comprising about eighteen syllables, is lost. It might have contained the name of the king to whose reign the inscription was referred.
After pana, the lower part of the third syllable is visible, which is most probably & subscript , judging from the formation of pra in the beginning of the next line. We may restore this word as panatrice (paschalrithfa). The following letters, which are now missing, obviously contained the name of the season and then probably such words w paikhe chhathe, as is suggested by the numeral 6 before the word divasa in the end of this line.
The syllable preceding ka, only a lower portion of which is now preserved, may have been ri. The word however, cannot be restored.
* The right-hand portion of this letter is effaced. It has been read as initial a, but the curl at its lower end forma almost a circle, and as such it differs from that found in a of Ayaloka 1. 4 and Alaporena 1. 6.
The reading of this name is doubtful. The letter to shows on its top something like a hook opening to the left. If that is meant to be the sign for medial i, we have to read the syllable as ri and not as ra. Moreover, the impression shows some faint traces of a letter between fiha and es. The last syllablo appears a little below the line, making it difficult to ascertain whether the intervening letter is conjoined with sa or whether it stands independently. The latter is most probably the case, the word is required to be in the genitive. Thus Virakhadasa may have been the intended reading.
• This partial line of writing was inserted later, as is clear from its position. Obviously, the two words con. tained herein were irst left out by the engraver through oversight, who discovered the omission after having inoised the whole record and then could do nothing but apply the omitted matter in the manner he has done. The latter che in amachena was imperfectly formed due to the insertion between the narrow space below the downward our of a in l. 4. Hence it is read as amachena and not amakhena. If we adopt amakhena it would be proper name.
* The reading is probably Ataberena, Atabers being a personal name. 11 There is an ornamental design carved here, which marks the conclusion of the record.
