Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 266

Reprinted from JOURNAL OF THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE, March 1952.
WHAT WAS THE PLACE OF ISSUE OF THE DHAULI AND JAUGADA SEPARATE EDICTS?
By
DR. M. A. MEHENDALE M A., PH.D.
Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute, Foona.
The general belief regarding the issue and the transcription of the edicts. of Asoka is that they were all first written in the eastern or the Magadhan language, as they were issued from the Emperor's capital in the Magadha, and then were translated in the local languages of the different places where they were inscribed. While the veracity of such a general statement may reasonably be doubted, the fact remains that the inscriptions of Asoka show in bold relief three (or two) varieties of the Prakrit dialects-the Western represented by the Girnar version, the north western represented by the Shahbazgarhi version, (though both these labour under strong eastern influence) and the eastern represented by the Dhauli and the Jaugada versions. Hence the theory that. the original drafts of Asoka written in the eastern dialect were altered at Girnär and Shahbazgarhi to suit the requirements of the local dialects seems to be legitimate. Hultzsch observes, while commenting on the word Turamayo which occurs in the Girnar version, "This word proves that the Girnår and the Shāhbāzgarhi versions are translations from the Magadha dialect, where the (1) of the Greek original is preserved (Tulamaye) at Kälsi." But some of the instances in these western and north-western areas show exceptions to the general set up of the linguistic unity shown by the versions in these regions, and some of them have been explained as due to the eastern influence. Thus, for instance, the presence of a few forms with instead of r, and of nom, sg. mas. ending in-e instead of the regular-o have been explained as due to the influence of the Magadhan language of the original draft. It has, however, not been attempted to see if the exceptions occurring in the eastern versions can be similarly explained as due to outside influence.
On a close reading of all the edicts found at Dhauli and Jaugada it will be observed that some of the exceptions which do not conform with the linguistic picture seen in the edicts at these two places occur only in the two separate edicts. The unique feature of these two edicts is that they are found only at these two places and not along with other major edicts at other places. It would, therefore, be reasonable to suppose that the exceptions which occur in the separate edicts do not represent the local forms, but may be due to the influence of a language foreign to the east. It may have been that these two
Madhu Vidya/241