Indian Antiquary Vol 48

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 219

NOVEMBER, 1919)
MISCELLANEA
215
Such examples of the use of vôchchhinna as these. The reading of the first part of the sentence is do not warrant us in holding that váchhina (vyava. even more uncertain. The word between pana. chchhinna) may also be used in the sense of a year tariya and raja.Muriya-kiile is enigmatical. In being ended. In Indian epigraphic records gata tho facsimile the letter after sa looks ratho. like or alita is used to denote the expired year, but cha or chi and the next letter is evidently ta and vyavachchhinna is nowhere else used in this sense. not va, for the lower part of it consists of a semi. In the early Brahmi and Khároshthi inscriptions circle opening below instead of a circle. The three of Northern India the date is expressed by san- letters that follow ta look like satato. But whatvatsard or sabatoare, or briefly by sån or ea, and in ever may be the correct reading or meaning of the Brahmt inscriptions of Western and Southern sachi (cha) ta sa ta to, no date can be denoted by India by vast, varsha, sathwachchhard or its variante. I this group of letters. but never by any terms like råjamuriya-kaus. The Mr. V. A. Smith works out the date of Khåra véla mention again of both the expired and the current in a different way. In line 6 of the Hathigumpha years of the same era side by side is both unique inscription occurs this sentence - and superfluous. Evidently to avoid this diffi- Parichama cha dâni vasê Nam)da-raja-tivasasata. culty and to provide the verb upadayati (utpâdayati) (ghitam Tanasuliyavâta panalim nagaram ? with an object, Mr. Jayaswal proposes to read and pavesa ....... translate the second part of the 'sentence as Dr. Lüders translates this sentence thus -"In follows:
the fifth year he had an aqueduct (panadi) that had chhe-yashi Argasi ti kartáriyar upadayati not been used for 103 years since king (rajan) “The cave (kantari, kandara), of six poles, called
Nanda (or since the Narda Kings ?) conducted the arkasi (Skt. arkasika) is made."
into the city." Mr. V. A. Smith writes, “If we
assume 322 B.C. as the end of the Namda dynasty, But Plate IV attached to Mr. Jayaswal's article
the fifth year of Khåravela would be 103 years later, shows that the reading chhe-yathi for choyatha in
namely 219 B.C. and his accession should be impossible. As regards the next word argasi, in
placed, about 223 B.O." But the wide difference & Prakrit inscription the language of which is so
in form between the alphabet cf the edicte of Asoka much akin to Pali, conjunct rga is phonetically
on the one hand and that of the Hathigumph& impossible, and the mark on the left side of ga in
inscription on the cther, already noted by BhagaMr. Jayagwal's Plate cannot be mistaken for the
vanlal, renders this estimate of Khára véla's date superscript r. The i-mark of sg also is not visible
quite untenable. The most notable characteristics un the facsimile, and Bhagavanlal and Banerji failed
of the Hathigumph& alphabet are :-(1) A con. to notice it on the rock.
siderable number of letters with thick-headed Since the above was in type Mr. Jayaswal has published in JBORS., Vol. IV, Part IV, & second article entitled Hathigumphå Inscription revised from the Rook (pp. 364-403), wherein in place of tham bhe patit ha payali C) Pan-an tariya-sathi-vasa sate Raja Muriya-Kale vochhine chheyath Argasi di Kamtariyaupadiyati in line 16, he now proposes to read, thambhe patit ha payati () panatariya sata-sahashi (J Muriya Kalamt vochhinam (nem?) cha choyat hi-agasatilam tariyam upadayati [1] (p. 402). (a) The substitution of sata-sahasehi for eat hi-vase-sate-Raja shows that the old reading is very doubtful. But it is algo difficult to accept Mr. Jayaswal's new reading, particularly he instead of raja, as Against the impressions published by himself with his first article and against the reading of Bhagavanlal and Mr. R. D. Banerji both of whom examined the rock. The elimination of the term raia rendere the acceptance of this solitary instance of Muriya-Kala as a royal era still more difficult. (6) Mr. Jayaswal's rendering of the expression beginning with Muriya-Kala is also cpen to objection. Ho translates it, "He (the king) completes the Muriya time (ers), counted, and being of an interval of sixty-four with a century" (p. 395). The rendering of vochhine as "counted " is even more far-fetched than expired'. The particle cha after vochhine makes it difficult to read it as vochhinam qualifying the substentive Muriya-Kalam. Even if we overlook vochhine, the passage appears to be a very unusual way of stating a date. Still more unusual is the statement of a date asan independent achievement in a prasasti, for this is how Mr. Jayaswal takes it to be by treating Muriya Kalam as accusative to upadayati. The root di from which Mr. Jayaswal proposes to derive upadayati means to perish, die, waste, decay, diminish (Apte).' So the rendering of upadayati 86 'completes' is also very far-fetched. What, again, is the significance of, "He (Khåravela) completes the Muriya time (era)" 1 Khåravela was not a Muriya (Maurya) but a Cheta (a name not unknown to literature, as Cheta princes are mentioned in the Vessantara Jataka), and it is not clear how a king of one line could complete the era of another.
• Vincent Smith, Early History of India, p. 2, note 2 (3rd Ed.).