________________
August, 1918)
MISCELLANEA
223
the third year of his reign, by Usava-samaja, just like Pulumayi. It was worth noticing here, that in the record dampa (?) nata-gita-vadita-samdasanahi is mentioned over and above U sava-sumája-kúrâpandhi. This makes clear that in tnose days samaja or theatre did not merely consist of dancing and music. These are then instances to show that the Hindu theatre began to receive State support from very early times.
MISCELLANEA. HẬTHIGUMPHÁ INSCRIPTION.
very little ground of doubt in the facsimile given MESSRS. K. P. JAYASWAL and R. D. BANERJI
by Pandit Bhagwin LÂl Indraji. Now that an have placed the students of Indian Antiquity
impression has been prepared on approved scientific under a deep obligation by having made accessible
method, it is time to examine closely the original to them, for the first time, a reliable version of the
words as they stand in the record. Fortunately, very important inscription of King Khåravela at
Mr. Banerji has taken a separate impression of the Häthigumphà (J BORS., 1917, pp. 425-507).
dated portion' (see Plate IV) and it may be Mr. Jayaswal has further increased the value of his
hoped, therefore, that we have here the best publication by adding a learned introduction and
mechanical estampage of the portion that we may various notes for clearing up the subject, and it
ever hope to obtain, may be confidently expected that ere long the Now any one who even cursorily glances at contents of this valuable inscription will be fully Plate IV must at once come to the conclusion that utilised for studying the history of the period. the letters read as “Sa hi va sa" are far from Before this can be done, however, we must arrive clear. In the first place the second letter can be at a definite understanding about the date of this hardly read as thi'. This may be verified by a record. I propose, therefore, to discuss this point comparison of the other tha's in the record, e.g. in some detail in the following pages.
that of 'Choya (or ? a) ta' in the same line The various theories entertained on the subjeot
Rathika' in l. 6, and 'Athame' in l. 7. The have been summarised by Mr. R. D. Banerji, on next letter read as va' looks like 'ta' for its pp. 488-489, in his note. They may be divided
lower limbs are not joined and there is no sign that Into two classes. According to one, there is a they were ever so joined. The third letter, read direct reference to a date in line 16 of the record;
Assa, looks more like 'pa' than anything else ; according to the other, there is no date in line 16
the left limb of sa' is entirely wanting for we but there are references to some events elsewhere I cannot suppose that the same stroke served both (11. 6 and 11) in the record from which an idea of as the right limb of' ta'(or, va) as well as the left its approximate date may be formed.
limb of sa! Both Mr. Jayaswal and Mr. R. D. Banerji have
It thus appears to me, that, so far at least as endorsed the first of these theories, and have 1 the facsimile goes, there is no justification for the unhesitatingly pronounced that the record does reading 'sathivasa-sate'. In the absence of this contain a date in line 16,-" In the time of reading, there remains no trace whatsoever in the king Muriya [Chandragupta] which had elapsed by inscription, of any direct reference to a date. hundred and sixty-five years according to Mr. Jayaswal (pp. 449, 451) and " in the era of the Now, conceding for a moment, that the record Maurya kings, one hundred and sixty years increas. really contains the date 165, of the era of Muriya ed by five..." Bccording to Mr. Banerji [Chandragupta) or of the Maurya kings as con(p. 492). Inspite of this difference of interpreta- tended by Mr. Jayaswal and Mr. Banorji, and is to tion, which, by the way, is not insignificant, both be placed in about 161 B.C. let us see what result the scholars take their stand upon the same follows. The record, as interpreted by these two reading, viz." Pan-amtariya-sathi-vasa-sate Raja. scholars, mentions in line 6, that king Khåravela, Muriya kale." The correctness of this reading in his fifth year, brought into the capital the canal (with slight unimportant modifications) have excavated by king Nanda three centuries before. hitherto been conceded even by those (e.g. Dr. As Mr. Banerji has shown (p. 498), this would Fleet) who were not disposed to look upon it as mean that a king Nanda was master of Kaliga in containing a date, for there seomed to have been about 465 or 469 B.C. Mr. Banerji would identify
& Journal of the Bihar and Orisea Research Society, 1917, 456.
T'To show further that it was really a full-fledged theatrical performance in the sense that actual dramas were enacted on the stage, I should like to draw the attention of scholars to the ocurrence of the word nitaka, i. e, drama, in the J aldlea (IV, 105).
Fleet nu doubt suggested some alterations, but he fully admitted the possibility of tyis reading. See his reading quoted by Mr. Banerji on p. 491.
