________________
AUGUST, 1881.]
DATES OF ANCIENT INDIAN INSCRIPTIONS AND COINS.
225
who have left behind them such an abundance rectly refers to this victory of S â taka ņņiover of monuments in the caves of Nâsik and the Kshaharâta prince. This inscription is dated, other places of Western India.
"from the victorious camp of the triumphant The three princes most frequently mentioned army," and it records the donation of certain in the Cave inscriptions, reigued in this suc- lands to a fraternity of monks, "the revenue cession:
of which had been received hitherto by UshaNa hap âņa,
bhadâta." From the fact of Ushavad â ta's Siri-S ataka ņņi, son of the queen being in possession of the royal demesnes at the Gotami.
time of Satakaņņi's victorious invasion, we Siri-Paluma yi, son of the preceding conclude that either the Kshaharâta prince king and of the queen Våsitthi.
overthrown by S&takaņņi was Nabapa na himNa ha på na is known to us by the inscrip- self, or that from his death to the dissolution of tions of his son-in-law, who probably held the his dynasty, only a short time can have elapsed. office of his lieutenant, Dinikaputra Ushavadata; The coin of Nahapana found in Kathiâ wad, his title runs in Sanskrit,
will assist as in establishing a chronological Rajñaḥ Kshaharátasya? kshatrapasya Naha- connexion between the kings of whom we are pánasya.
speaking now, and the Kshatrapa dynasty. The And in Prakrit (Junnar inscription): maha- Kshatrapa coins form a continuous, coherent khatrapasa sámi-Nahapanasa.
series which is in full accordance with the A silver coin of this Nahapana has been found genealogy of those princes as contained in the iu Kathiâwâą.os
inscriptions. In this series the Kshatrapa After Nahapana we find in the series of Naha pana cannot be inserted. His place cave inscriptions two kings of a different family, can only be before the series of Kshatrapas; the Sata vâ hana or Åndhra bhritya also the palæographical character of his indynasty; their names are Sata kanni and his scriptions, compared with those of the other son Pulu máyi, Satakaņņi bad conquered Kshatrapas, tends to show this," and scholars Nahapana's realm by force. In one of the | agree in assigning to Naha på na this position. Nåsik inscriptions he is called the destroyer of It seems to me, however, that they are wrong the Sakas, Yavanas, and Palhavas, who has in considering Nahapana as an ancestor of the left nothing of the Khakhar åta family, who later Kshatrapas; he appears indeed to have has firmly established the glory of the Sata- been rather their predecessor belonging to vâhana family. It can scarcely be doubted a different dynasty." For neither do the Ksha
hat. Khakhatáta to is a mistake for Khaharâta, trapa inscriptions lead back the genealogy of i.e. Kshaharâta, which would consequently be the that family to Nahapana, nor do they attribute name of the satrap dynasty to which Nahapâna anywhere to the Kshatrapas the name of belonged. We possess an inscription which di- Kshaharâta, which was the family name
en For the literature of the Cave inecriptions, which are edited for the most part in the different volumes of the Journ. Bom. Br. R. As. Soc., I refer to Dr. Burnell's excellent work, Elements of South Indian Paleography. p. 18, note 1. The most important series of these inscriptions, those found at Nasik, have been edited and translated by Prof. Bhandarkar, Transactions of the International Congress of Orientalists, London, 1876, pp. 806 seq. *** Kshahardta, the name of the dynasty, as we shall show, to which Nahapana belonged, looks very much like & hybrid compound of Persian and Sanskrit: he who has been given Tráta] (to the people) by the Shah [hshaha). Compare the proper names Devarata, Vishnorata, &c. A name like this in a loyal satrap family need not be thought stringe.
See Mr. Newton's plato (Jr. Bombay Br. R. A. S., vol. IX, p. 5), No. 1; Mr. Thomas's plate (The Gupta Dynasty), or Arch. Sur. W. In. No. 6. I cannot suppress the conjecture that this Nahapana, who appears to have ruled an extensive realm through a long period, is identical with the king Nahavahana, whom the Jainas say reigned from 418 till 458 after the death of Mah&vira.
* No. 36 of Mr. West's series : Saka-Yavana-Palhava-
nisudonasa .... Khakhardtavo[oh saniravasesakarasa Sátavdhanakulayasapatithapana karasa.
10 This is the reading of Brett and of West. Bhând&rkar believes that Khagåråta or Khakhåráta is written.
1 Ngik inser. 25. The initial words of this inscription. which have not been well treated by Prof. Bhåndarkar, are to be corrected as follows: "Sidhar, sendya vejayarh. tiya vijayakhanhdha vård," exactly as later inscriptions very often are dated," skandhavirdt, vijayaskandha. wäre," etc. We have here the oldest or one of the oldest examples, highly interesting to epigraphists, of that form of royal grants which was repeated afterwards, in more developed forms, innumerable times in the inscriptions of the Valabhi, Chalukya, and other dynasties.'
19 It should be observed also that Nahapana's coin gives his name both in Baktrian and in Indian writing : of the Kshatrape coinage only one coin does the same, and this is the oldest of the whole series, the coin of Chashana.
13 I am glad to see that Mr. Bhagv&nlal Indraji holds the same opinion as to Nahapana's relation to the Kshatrapa princes: Bee Journ. Bombay Br. R. As. Soc., vol. XIII, p. 814. With the chronological theories, proposed by the same scholar, l. c. p. 816, I cannot agree.
