The Indian Analyst
 

South Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Index

Introduction

Contents

List of Plates

Additions and Corrections

Images

Contents

Bhandarkar

T. Bloch

J. F. Fleet

Gopinatha Rao

T. A. Gopinatha Rao and G. Venkoba Rao

Hira Lal

E. Hultzsch

F. Kielhorn

H. Krishna Sastri

H. Luders

Narayanasvami Ayyar

R. Pischel

J. Ramayya

E. Senart

V. Venkayya

G. Venkoba Rao

J. PH. Vogel

Index

Other South-Indian Inscriptions 

Volume 1

Volume 2

Volume 3

Vol. 4 - 8

Volume 9

Volume 10

Volume 11

Volume 12

Volume 13

Volume 14

Volume 15

Volume 16

Volume 17

Volume 18

Volume 19

Volume 20

Volume 22
Part 1

Volume 22
Part 2

Volume 23

Volume 24

Volume 26

Volume 27

Tiruvarur

Darasuram

Konerirajapuram

Tanjavur

Annual Reports 1935-1944

Annual Reports 1945- 1947

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 2, Part 2

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 7, Part 3

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 1

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 2

Epigraphica Indica

Epigraphia Indica Volume 3

Epigraphia
Indica Volume 4

Epigraphia Indica Volume 6

Epigraphia Indica Volume 7

Epigraphia Indica Volume 8

Epigraphia Indica Volume 27

Epigraphia Indica Volume 29

Epigraphia Indica Volume 30

Epigraphia Indica Volume 31

Epigraphia Indica Volume 32

Paramaras Volume 7, Part 2

Śilāhāras Volume 6, Part 2

Vākāṭakas Volume 5

Early Gupta Inscriptions

Archaeological Links

Archaeological-Survey of India

Pudukkottai

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

No. 7, Plate iii.

On the back wall of Cave No. 7, left of the doorway.

TEXT.

1 Bhayaṁta-Savasânaṁ aṁtevâ-
2 siniya pavayitâya Tâpasi-
3 niya cha deyadhama [leṇa]
4 châtudisasa bhikhusaghasa dataṁ.

REMARKS.

This epigraph is missing in AS. I give the reading of Bhagwanlal rather than a transcription of my own. The estampages appear to be even less legible than the photographs. The letters are not deeply cut, so that the back of the estampages shows almost nothing. The direct examination of the stone may have enabled Bhagwanlal to see more than I can discover on the facsimiles. I can only abandon to him the honour and responsibility of the reading. Our facsimile is besides probably too short. For in the first line, where the visible traces indeed seem to confirm his transcription, the final which he has read is certainly wanting, and the following lines also, if compared with his readings, seem to be incomplete on the right. In the second line I am unable to make out pavayitâya, and even less Tâpasiº. The rest looks more probable. I must, however, except the last word. Besides the fact that no trace of data appears, it is not that participle, but niyâtita, which is ordinarily used in that way. In l. 3 the cha must be wrong ; to all appearance we have to do with a single gift.

>

TRANSLATION.

“ This cave, a pious gift of Tâpasinî, a female ascetic, a disciple of the reverend Savasa, granted to the universal Saṅgha of ascetics.”

It is hardly credible that the name of the donor should be omitted, as the epigraph takes the trouble to commemorate the name of her religious teacher. So she must have been called Tâpasinî, admitting the reading to be correct. We have already met (in N. 4) with Tâpasa as a man’s name. As to that of the teacher, always supposing the reading to be correct, I do not see, among several possibilities, any Sanskṛit transcription which can be safely admitted. The reading Sovasa is not impossible ; it reminds of Sovasaka which in K. 20 seems to be an ethnic name, probably = Sauvarsha. Bhâjâ (AS. No. 4) supplies another instance of the pluralis majestatis : therânaṁ bhaaṁta-Dhamagirinâṁ.

No. 8, Plate viii. (N. 7.)

On the back wall of the veranda in Cave No. 8, right of the doorway.

TEXT.

Dâsakasa Mugûdâsasa (1) saparivârasa leṇa (2) deyadhama (3).

REMARKS.

(1) AS. Mugudâº. The û is not quote distinct. The double stroke, however accounts best for the crack, and besides the û is sure in the following number.─ (2) G. leṇaṁ. Even the much more the ṁ, is extremely indistinct.─ (3) G. ºdhaṁma.

Home Page

>
>