________________
94
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[MARCH, 1890.
general, it could only be in the plural. We are therefore led to the following translation, - that the maha mdtra) knowing these things, should act according to my instructions ; such is the thought which guides me,' and by these words, the king explains his intentions in directing his officers to preside at the quinquennial assemblies. It will be understood that I translate Kalati as a subjunctive. Its form is that of a real Vedic lé. This is not the only trace of the use of this mood left in our monuments. I have already drawn attention to vadhati above (iv. n. 12). Perhaps we have the first person in kalámi [Dhauli vi. 1. 29 (Jangada bas a lacuna). I admit that a comparison with G. seems to indicate a simple present and that the correction to kalómi is easy, but we should only take to corrections as a last resource. Now, at Khálsi, in the parallel passage, we find, not the present, bat the future kachhami. In this place, and the more naturally as the subject is in the first person, the future and the subjunctive are exactly equivalent. Both suit the run of the passage, being associated and co-ordinated with the imperative pativédayantu.
27. A short way above, Jangada (1. 5) employs vaga to represent the bahujana of Dhauli. It is therefore natural to take the word as having the same value here. In the 3rd of the Fourteen Edicts, Piyadasi mentions as the ordinary participators in the anusanyána, in addition to the officers, all the faithful of his belief (yutá). Vaga well describes a numerous assemblage of the kind : hé disa refers to what precedes, and marks the crowd as analogous to that assembled directly by the king himself. Dr. Kern, basing his opinion on the analogy of rukáya in the 12th edict, considers that the word applies exclusively to the officials; but the text of Jaugada in the preceding sentence seems to show that the officials were called to the meetings in question individually; and this circumstanoe, together with the different use of vaga in the present edict, hardly bears out this interpretation.
28. Dr. Kern has joined the last visible character, a, of line 24, with the first of the following line, so as to form one word. He reads ata, equivalent to atra. In Mr. Burgess's facsimile, however, the a appears to have been followed by several characters (as was also admitted by Prinsep) which are now indistinct, and which the lacuna in Jaugada does not help us to restore. Besides this, the reading té being now certain, there can be no doubt about its being the demonstrative, in agreement with mahámátá. For the general meaning of the sentence, see note 26. We must also compare the 3rd of the Fourteen Edicts, where it is said in substance that some officers of the king must attend the anusanyána, as well as to their other duties. Here the thought is identical in substance: the officers are to appear there, without neglecting their other duties. There is, however, one important difference. The first passage summons the rajjúkas or prádésikas to the anusanyána in order there to deliver religious instruction, whereas the ordinary mahámátras, here addressed, are called to those assemblies, with the view that they may receive religious advice and the king's instructions.
JAUGADA. As regards Jaugada, I have only to draw attention to a few details, and to refer the reader to the notes on Dhauli where all the various difficulties have been touched upon, and where the elements will be found which are necessary for filling up most of the lacunas.
29. The engraving of this edict does not appear to have been done with much care. I have said above (Dhauli n. 2) that if, as there seems to be some probability, we must really read - kiiti kakamana, one of the two ka can only be, in my opinion, an erroneous repetition, like, in line 8, one of the two sa in kamasasa mê kuté. So, again, I consider nitiyan, in line 7, to be an instance of the repetition of an entire word. We shall shortly meet with examples of the reverse, where several characters are sure to have been erroneously omitted.
30. Read tuphe. In line 3, mama has been forgotten. In line 8, we have idjadhi for lajáladhi. In line 9, alá for antalá.
