South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

4 . . . . . ? e (3) Anugâmimhi Ujeniya Sâkhâya
5 . . . . . to brâhmaṇâ bhujate (4) satasâha-
6 . . . . . vatâ (5) brâhmaṇânaṁ gavâṁ satasa-
7 . . . . . bhagavatâ (6) davâna brâhmaṇânaṁ cha datâ
8 . . . . . Chetrasudhe panarasa (7) Kshaharâ-
9 . . . . . gavâṁ ? tasahasradena (8) Usha-
10 . . . . . . . (9) nadîye Baṇâsaya (10) da-
11 . . . . suvaṇa tithe (11) che ñayate (12) tasa
12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . (13)

REMARKS.

(1) AS. [ . . . . Śorpâra]ge Vechiṁñe. The reading ve seems possible ; but not, I think, the reading ge.─ (2) G. and AS. ºgare.─ (3) G. and AS. [ . . . . Bharuka]chhe anu º. I cannot make out the chh.─ (4) G. bhuṁjate.─ (5) G. [ . . . . bhagavatâṁ] brâ º ; AS. [rî . . . . .] brâº. The characters vatâṁ seem to be still discernible on the estampage.─ (6) G. and AS. [hasra . . . . . bhagava]tâ.─ (7) G. ºrase.─ (8) G. and AS. gavâṁ śata º. The ś is very doubtful ; we could as well read s. Before ga I think I can make out an n, probably the ending of ºdena.─ (9) G. º[vadâtena] . . . . . brâhma . . . naº.─ (10) AS. ºdîya Baṇâsâya ; G. ºṇâsâya─ (11) AS. ºvaṇâtiº.─ (12) G. cha ñâyate. This reading, especially cha, is quite possible.─ (13) G. . . . . chati. I can see nothing of these characters.

TRANSLATION.

“ [Success !] By permanent charities of Ushavadâta, the Śaka, [son of Dînîka], son-in-law of king Nahapâna, the [Kshaharâ]ta Kshatrapa, one hundred-thousand holy Brâhmaṇas dine [the whole year round] at . . . . . Chechiñña, at the town of Dâhanûkâ, at Kekâpura, . . . . . at Anugâmi, at Ujenî, at Sâkhâ. [By the same, three]-hundred-thousand cows have been given to holy Brâhmaṇas, [and sixteen villages] have been given to the holy gods and Brâhmaṇas. [In the year . . . . ], in the bright half of Chaitra, on the fifteenth day . . . . by Usha[vadâta] money and a tîrtha have been bestowed in the Barṇâsâ river . . . .”

The lost characters in the beginning of several lines can be easily and safely filled in from K. 13 and N. 10. The first line, the restoration of which is certain, proves that every line has lost about eight letters.

1 [Sidhaṁ raño Kshaharâ]
2 [tu Dînîkaputasa]
5 [anuvâsaṁ bhagavaṁ]
6 [sî . . . . bhaga]
7 [hasâni tîṇi datâni]
8 [soḷasa gâmâ vase . . ].

Unfortunately this restoration supplies nothing but known elements and is consequently of little interest. We can restore neither the date nor the local names in ll. 3, 4, nor can we say definitely what is missing at the beginning of l. 11. I am equally unable to state how and under what circumstances the word Kshaharâta was introduced in line 8, because other epigraphs mention that name only among the titles of Nahapâna. The 10th line began of course with the letters vadâtena,completion Usha in the preceding one, and they were probably followed by some epithet. The word tigosatasahasadena of N. 10 would fit as to length ; but this gift has already been mentioned in the foregoing lines, independently of the gift of one-hundred-thousand cows, he mention of which immediately precedes. It seems indeed certain that the donations enu-