________________
Juur, 1904.)
SOME TERMS IN THE KSHATRAPA INSCRIPTIONS
171
object of the gift. Vijayabadàhavarman, at the end of a donation, equally set forth in Prakrit (Itul. Antiq. Vol. IX. p. 101), inserts two verses in Sanskrit and concludes with a Prākrit formula; these two verses are those so often met with under the name of Vyasa in all succeeding epigraphy; Bahubhir vasudha ... and Svadattas paradattain va. Here again, the authority of Vyāss gives these two verses & religions character, independent of the context. And more recent contributions to epigraphy only confirm my conclusions. In the Kondamudi plates (Epigr. Ind. Vol. VI. p. 315) of the prince Jayavarman, a contemporary of Sivaskandavarman, the charter is in Prakrit, but the names of the god Malieśvara and of the brahmanical götra Bțihatphalāyana are in pure Sanskrit and so also is the legend on the seal :- Bțihatphalāyanasagotrasya mahārāja-sri-Jayavarmanah. And, like his Hirahadagalli plates, the Mayidarõlu plates of Sivaskandavarman (Epigr. Ind. Vol. VI. p. 84) are in Prakrit, and the name of the king is written Sivakha[]davammā; but the seal presents Sivaska ...., which suffices to establish the purely Sanskrit character of its legend. It is as a religions language that Sanskrit makes its appearance in the official epigraphy, apart from the epigraphy of the Kshatrapas. It is met with also, but hesitating, ancertain and [114] very brief, in the votive inscriptions of the time of the Kushanas and the Kshatrapas of Mathura : but these inscriptions, of Buddhist and Jaina inspiration, emanating from private individuals, reduce themselves to brief formalæ, and when, by accident, they happen to be correct, they ouly succeed by dint of their extreme brevity and their entire commonplaceness.
The presence of phrases and formulæ in correct Sanskrit, inserted in Prākrit inscriptions or added to them, expressly contradicts the interpretation given by the legend to the linguistic preferences of the Sätakarņis. Even when confined to their own direct testimony without recorrse to any outside control, the documents of the Kshatrapas suffice to prove it in error. Whereas, by a revolutionary innovation, their inscriptions are set forth in literary Sanskrit, the legends of their numerous coins are uniformly written in Präkrit, as in the case of the Satakarņis. It is only when we come down to the Gupta emperors, in the IV th century A. D., that we meet with the first legends on coins in authentic Sanskrit (e. g., Kacho gām avajitya karmabhir uttamair jayati). One only of the Kshatrapas, in advance of the time, coined money in Sanskrit, about the beginning of the second centary of the Kshatrapa era, at the end of the second century A. D.; the legend reads: rajño [ma]hākshatra pa]sya Dāmajadasriya[] putrasya rajio kshatrapasya Satyadāmna[A]. The only inaccuracy bears upon the application of an euphonic law : [116] rājilo kshatrapasya instead of rajñaḥ. But the innovation, which however does not appear very daring in a dynasty which regularly uses Sanskrit in its epigraphy, does not seem to have been a success; it called forth no imitations, and, whereas the coins of the Kshatrapas are generaily rather bumerous, that of Satyadaman is known by but one specimen (Rapson, J. R. A. S. 1899, p. 379). Without the formal testimony of epigraphy, one would be tempted to recognize in the numismatic usage of the Kshatrapas the same tendency to Sanskrit that has been observed in the inscriptions of Mathurā. Two centuries after Satyadaman, in 304 Ksh. (= 382 A. D.), the coinage of Simhasēna, known by several specimens, bears a legend where Sanskrit and Prākrit alternate curiously in the same inscription : Mahārāja-kshatrapascāmi-Rudrasēna-svasriya[sya] rājño mahākshatrapasa stāmi-Simhasēnasya (Rapson, ib. p. 398-400). And besides, the simultaneous occurrence of Prākrit genitives in osa and the Sanskrit forms rajño and kshatrapa in the whole monetary series of the Kshatrapas without exception, the sporadic appearance of the most delicate inflexions of Sanskrit in certain proper names (c.g., Rudradamnah parallel with Rudradāmasa, Damajadasriyah parallel with Dāmajadasa), still place under different aspects the pressing problem of the real relation between Sanskrit and Prikrit, -- or, in other words, the positive commencements of literary Sanskrit.
The religions element which dominates all the phenomena [116] of Hindu life seems to suffice to settle all these apparent contradictions. The opposition observed in linguistic usage between the Kshatrapas and the Satakarnis reappears in the religious attitude of the two dynasties. There can be no question, assuredly, in ancient India, of determined, absolute
