Indian Antiquary Vol 60

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 95

APRIL, 1931]
BOOK-NOTICE
On the word kharogths (p. xv) cp. now the ingenious suggestion of M. Przyluski which, however, seems fairly uncertain.
On p. xx Professor Konow discusses the curious word murunda,5 a Saka one that must apparently mean lord, chief. There can scarcely be any doubt that this word is connected with the Saka rrumda, which has been considered a genitive of the word rri, 'king' 6-certainly an entirely impos. sible suggestion. It, however, remains to be considered what is the sense of the first syllable mu-.
On hien-tu (p. xiii) cp. also von Gutschmid, Geschichte Irans, p. 60.
The identification dréi: "Aσtot (p. Iviii), in spite of a certain verisimilitude, still remains entirely uncertain (ep. p. lxi).
On p. xevi aï is, of course, not derived from ayam, but from a form ayah, cp. Shahbazgarhi ayi and bhuibhúyaḥ in the Zeda inscription. This phonetical development probably is intimately connected with the development as>-i in Eastern Iranian.7
Whether Minamdra for Mevavdpos (p. xcvii) cp. Pali Milinda-marks an Indian development e> or renders the actual Greek pronunciation, may be left undecided.
The name Travasakura (Peshawar no. 20, p. xcviii) in its first part undoubtedly reminds us of Trapusa, Tapussa8; but then again what is "kura? Extremely curious are the writings trt, gr -g-, -y-, etc., which have not been satisfactorily explained; nor can I offer any plausible explanation. The writing eh (p. ci) apparently in several cases simply means f.
On p. 14 is discussed a name Damijada which is apparently connected with the Damajada or Dámaysada of the Western Keatrapas. Of its Iranian origin there can be no doubt; the form anybow represents something like Dámizada. In this same inscription Professor Konow's translation of the words savalavadhapitra sardha is not quite intelligible to me.
In the Taxila Copperplate (p. 28 f.) the words Takhaliluye nagare utarea apparently make a bad construction; but there can be little doubt that they must mean to the north of the City Taxila. In the same inscription the words bhratara sarva ca [natigabamdha]vasa ca puyayanto (provided the reading be correct) most probably are bhráirn sarvámáca játrkabandhuvaméam ca pújayan. The name Hayuara on the Mathurê Lion Capital
79
(p. 37) is doubtless an Iranian one; why should it not be connected with the Saka haj(u)valo 'wise'?
In the same inscription we find a somewhat disputed word kadhavara, which Professor Lüders wanted to connect with a kantha, meaning 'town,' in the Saka and Sogdian languages, and also known to Panini. On this kantha a somewhat extensive discussion is found in Le Monde Oriental, XVIII, 1 ff.
The introductory sentence of the Mathurâ Lion Capital has generally been construed in the same way by all previous interpreters; and there is no doubt whatsoever that it runs as follows: the chief queen of the Mahakastrapa Rajula, the daughter of Azes Kamuia, the mother of the crown. prince Kharaosta, Nadadiakasa,' etc. Professor Konow, however, raises various objections to such an interpretation and finally arrives at a translation (p. 48), according to which the lady's name is really Ayasia Kamuia, the daughter of Kharaosta, the mother of Nada Diaka.' If, however, her name was really Ayasia, why is it not written Ayas(r)ia like Piépas(r)ia following later? Professor Konow further (p. 35) objects that the common construction of the sentence leads to the assumption of Kamuïa being the genitive of a stem Kamui, which would be an unheard-of form. With this objection I am rather at one, 11 But Kamuïa whatever the word means-need be nothing like a genitive. In a language as uncouth as this one Ayasia Kamuïa may well be a slip for what ought properly to be Kamuia-Ayasia, i.e., a nominative coupled with a genitive. With such a construction ep. coin-legends like priyapita Stratasa which would apparently render a Greek φιλοπάτορος Στρατωνος, maharajabhrata dhramikasa Spalahorasa, maharaja rajatiraja tratara devavrata Gudapharasa, 13 etc.
On p. 56 f. it would be very tempting to put vayira- vydghra-; but phonetical considerations seem to make such a suggestion impossible.
The reconstruction of the Taxt-i-Bâhî inscription (p. 57 ff.) has been reduced to its proper proportions in JRAS, 1930, p. 189 f.
In the Kaldarra inscription of the year 113 (p. 65 f.) no valid objection can be raised against Senart's translation of Datiaputresa by the son of Datis.' In the same inscription the correctness of rendering the word sarvasapaşa by sarvasarpanám is too obvious to be made doubtful even by the objections
4 JRAS, 1930, 43 ff.
5 He has certainly quite correctly identified Saka-murusda with the Chinese Sai-wang.
8 Cp. Hoernle, Manuscript Remains, I, 349; on rri and x-plons cp. Acta Or., VII, 196, n. 4.
7 Op. Dr. Tedesco, Zeitschr. J. Indologie, IV, 126 ff.
8 According to Buddhist tradition the well-known bearer of this name originated from Northern India. What is found in JRAS, 1927, 232, concerning and in the Niya inscriptions can scarcely xplain the writing -ar-s- in some of our inscriptions.
10 Cp. Leumann, Zur nordar. Sprache, p. 139; Hoernle, Manuscript Remains, I, 338.
11 With alight astonishment I, however, find that on p. 152 Professor Konow considers Arthamisiya quite a possible genitive of Arthamisi.
13 Cp. CHI, I, 589 f.