|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA her son, seems to indicate a Brâhmaṇical origin. In the case of an ordinary householder of the Vaiśya class we would doubtlessly have gahapati as elsewhere. No. 6, Plate iv. (K. 6). Chaitya cave. On the pillar of the verandah in front of the central door.
REMARKS. (1) AS. and CTI. read ºṇukâkaº. The long â seems very doubtful ; the slanting stroke resembles a simple crack.─ (2) After Sâmi, CTI. inserts ka and AS. le ; but in the estampages there is no trace of a letter which might have disappeared. The ṇa is very probable, but the crack which crosses the top of the character does not absolutely exclude the reading nâ.─ (3) AS. and CTI. read puteṇa ; but the e attached to the t is at least very indistinct. Besides, it appears from a comparison of the preceding line that there ought to have been an additional letter here. The existing traces would seem to point to the reading putakeṇa, though this diminutive is not very plausible.─ (4) AS. and CTI. read mughaṁ. I cannot distinguish the anusvâra, but will not deny that it exists. The stone is so much defaced that no detail is quite certain here.─ (5) The d has a hook at the bottom which can easily be taken for u ; but it must not be forgotten that here, as in other cases, this vowel is represented by a vertical line. The hook at the top is too slanting to be considered an â. The e expressed by the stroke at the top of r seems less doubtful. As the whole lower right portion of the m is obliterated, the reading mu of AS. and CTI. is possible, but simply hypothetical. Between this character and the dhu the space makes is probable that one letter is lost. Certain traces suggest an h, perhaps mahâ. The last letter, read as ka in As. and CTI., is at least very doubtful. CTI. adds a final sa which, in my opinion, is inadmissible. The stone may have originally borne one or more additional letters. The sign of punctuation which AS. seems to discover, not without hesitation, is at any rate improbable.
TRANSLATION. âBy the carpenter Sâmi, son of Vêṇuvâsa, a native of Dhênukâkaṭa, there was made the opening of the cave. . . . . .â The mutilation of the text renders its explanation imperfect. What is sure, is, that we have here in some way the signature of a workman or artist. The separation of the usual compound gharamukha into gharasa mukha produces the impression that the inscription does not refer to the whole of the door, but to details connected with the opening. There may have been specified by the word or words which remain obscure at the end of the inscription. And as in fact the work of a carpenter is spoken of, we may have to think of some piece of carpentry or wood-decoration. The uncertainty of the reading leaves the name of this sculptor, Śyâmila, Svâmin, or otherwise, undetermined. No. 7, Plate i. (K. 7). Chaitya cave. On the top of the third pillar ; left row.
TEXT. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
