|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA either it establishes sendhura (for which, however, I cannot find any other authority) as a corruption of sindhûra, for sindhura, ‘ elephant,’ or else, and more probably, it is a mistake for “ siṁdûraṁ = seṁduraṁ,” based on a habit which, Dr. Kittel has told me, the manuscripts have of not unfrequently presenting an aspirated instead of an unaspirated letter and vice versâ. Beyond that, I can only say that Mr. Rice’s Karṇâṭakaśabdânuśâsanam of Bhaṭṭâkalaṅkadêva (1890), p. 108, under the illustrations of sûtra 160, does give sendura as the corruption of sindûra. So far, no authority has been found for the assertion that sindhura, ‘ an elephant,’ becomes sindûra. We have only obtained sindura, with the unspirated d but retaining the short u, as a corruption of that word, and sindhûra, with the long û but retaining the aspirated dh, as another form of it. But, also, we have not found any conclusive authority for sendûra or sêndûra as a corruption of sindûra, ‘ red lead.’ We have only obtained, more or less certainly sendura with the short u, and doubtfully sêndhûra with the aspirated dh, and sêndûra apparently deduced by inference from it. Turning, however, to other sources of information, we there obtain something quite definite. In a language closely allied to Kanarese, Mr. C. P. Brown’s Telugu-English Dictionary (1852) does not give sindura, sendura, sendûra, or sêndûra. It does give siṁdhuramu, with the meaning of only ‘ an elephant,’ and siṁdûramu, with the meanings of only ‘ red lead, minium,’ and ‘ a sort of tree.’ And, while it does mention siṁdhûramu with the aspirated dh and the long û, it specifies it as an “ error ” for siṁdûramu. But, in a language of which the vocabulary is very much mixed up with that of the Kanarese of the southern districts of the Bombay Presidency, Molesworth and Candy’s Marâṭhî-English Dictionary (1857), while not presenting sindhura, ‘an elephant,’ or sindura, does give siṁdûra, with the meaning of only ‘ red lead, minium,’ and gives śêṁdûra (with the palatal ś) as a popular form of it, and also sêṁdûra (with the dental s) with the indication that it is commonly written śêṁdûra. And Professor Pischel, in § 119 of his Prâkṛit Grammar (1900), Vol. I., Part 8, of the Grundriss der Indo-arischen Philologie und Altertumskunde, has given sendûra, with the short e and the long û, as the corruption of sindûra. On the other hand, the Pâiyalachchhînâmamâlâ of Dhanapâla, according to Dr. Bühler’s edition (1879), does not seem to deal with sindûra, but indicates, in verse 9, that sindhura, ‘ an elephant,’ retains the tatsama-form siṁdhura, and does not present any corruption of that word.
It would thus seem that, among the Kanarese authorities, there has been some confusion between sindhura, ‘ an elephant,’ and sindûra, ‘ red lead, minium, vermilion,’ which confusion, however, is in all probability confined to mistakes by copyists. But I cannot discover any authority of any kind for the assertion that sindhura, ‘ an elephant,’ takes the form sindûra, or any indication that the word sindûra has the meaning of ‘ an elephant.’ And there are no reasonable grounds for imputing any confusion between the two words to the writers of the ancient records. On the other hand, sendûra, sêndûra, and śêndûra are given as corruptions of sindûra by authorities of an unquestionable kind. We may, therefore, safely discard any idea that sindûtalañchhana and sendûralâñchhana can mean ‘ an elephant crest.’ And we may safely revert to my original rendering of it as the mark of vermilion, for which, however, there is now to be substituted, in more technical terms, the red-lead crest. The only point that remains, is, to determine exactly what we are to understand by a red-lead crest. Now, Monier-Williams’ Sanskṛit Dictionary, revised edition, gives sindûra-tilaka as meaning ‘ a mark on the forehead made with red lead.’[1] And, similarly, Dr. Kittel’s ____________________________ |
|