________________
No. 52] EPIGRAPHIC NOTES
341 Mr. Ghoshal had read, without noticing the peculiarity of the letters of the later Kalinga alphabet, as chudā (line 5), sachhobha, sanda (line 8), chúddani-prabha (line 9), dāñcha (line 12), tyoga (line 13), gangā (line 15), gagēya (line 22), acham, bbuvati (apparently a misprint for bhuvati, line 26) and dachyatë (corrected to pachyatë, line 29) should be read in my opinion respectively as chudhā, sakhobha, savda, chuddhaniprabhā, datva, tyaga, gāngā, gāgeya, akha tha, bhavati and pachyatē. Svasty for Svastya (line 1), tād for tāda (line 24 ; see the same also at p. 174, note 5) and sadata for sadata (line 27) may, however, be due to misprints.
Medial u has often been wrongly read by Mr. Ghoshal as ū; cf. sūtra (line 4), bhūto (lines 13-14), sūnu (lines 16 and 18-19), pūrvva, süriya (line 17), bhūmi (line 27), etc. In line 13 sa[*]padadhāra has been unnecessarily corrected to sam padām=ādhāra. The correction of adhivāsaka to vāsaka (cf. line 2) is equally unnecessary. In line 23, what has been read by Mr. Ghoshal as vijutya is clearly vijaya. He did not notice that the engraver had at first omitted the letter ja and incised the following two letters, ya and ra (of rājya). After having engraved ra, he found out the mistake and corrected ya to ja and ra to ya.
Mr. Ghoshal's reading and interpretation of the passage describing the gift land in lines 19-21 of the inscription have been considerably improved upon in an editorial note. I am, however, inclined to read the passage as upājitar Vāisiņicharaṇa-gramo Yaroku-kuļuvina dvaï-sada-halabhumi for Sanskrit upārjitā Vājasanēyicharana-grāmē Yaroku-kuțumbino dvi-sata-hala-bhumih. The donee of the grant thus acquired (probably by purchase): 200 halas of land that had been in the possession of an agriculturist householder named Yaröku in the village called Vājasanēyicharana.
In lines 24-25, Mr. Ghoshal reads likhitam=idań Mātrisiri-samatēna, this is written by Samanta Mātsisiri'. Since, however, the letter read as tri is clearly tye, I am inclined to read the passage as likhitam=ida[m-a*]mätyösna*] siri-Sāmatēna (Sri-Sämantena), 'this is written by the amätya éri-Samanta'. For Samanta as a personal name, we may refer to Bhandarkar's List, Nos. 344, 448, 2041, etc. The name may be compared with others such as Samantasēna, Samantasimha and Samantavarman, found in numerous inscriptions.
See J.R.A.S., 1952, pp. 4 ff.
