South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

chhâtraṁ dâṇḍaś=cha as meaning ‘ an umbrella and a stick.’ It is curious that these objects were not recovered with the Śrâvastî image, which Cunningham found standing in a small temple, and not in the open. The name of Friar Bala’s spiritual preceptor, which in the Śrâvastî inscription was only partly legible and had been restored by Dr. Bloch as Pushyamitra, appears from the epigraph on the umbrella post to be Pushyavuddhi, corresponding to Sanskṛit Pushya-vṛiddhi. Finally, the Sârnâth inscriptions establish beyond doubt that the Śrâvastî image belongs to the early Kushaṇa period.

Conversely the Śrâvastî inscription helps to elucidate some doubtful points in the Sârnâth legends. Thus we may safely assume that the chhatra-yashṭi of the Sârnâth inscriptions, which corresponds with the chhâtraṁ dâṇḍaś=cha of the Śrâvastî epigraph, is to be taken as a dvandva and not as a tatpurusha compound, and to be rendered by ‘ an umbrella with a staff ’ and not by an umbrella staff.’ Again we should be doubtful how to explain the connection between the Genitive bhikshusya Balasya trepiṭakasya and the following Nominative, if the Śrâvastî record did not give us the clue that the word dânaṁ is to be supplied.

Dr. Bloch’s remarks regarding the characteristic features of language and script of the Śrâvastî inscription apply equally to those of the Sârnâth ones. But in view of the date of the latter falling in Kanishka’s reign, it is impossible to maintain for the peculiar script which both exhibit the designation of “ Northern Kshatrapa ” in contradistinction with the so-called Kushaṇa script of a later period. Its more correct name would be “ early Kushaṇa,” and it shows indeed a transition between the script of Śoḍâsa’s epigraphs and those of the later Kushaṇas. The former^[1] is marked by more archaic forms and stands nearer to the Maurya type. In it we find post-consonantic a, e and o commonly expressed by horizontal, and not by slanting strokes as are found in the Kushaṇa inscriptions. The ya is still semi-circular at the bottom, and its middle vertical stroke sometimes exceeds the side ones in length. On the other hand, the similarity between the script of the Mathurâ satraps and that of the early years of Kanishka is so striking, that the two can be hardly separated by more than one century. If the former are to be placed in the first century B.C., palæographical evidence would point to the conclusion that the commencement of Kanishka’s reign has been rightly supposed to fall in the first century A.D.

It is only natural that the later Kushaṇa inscriptions, e.g. that on the Mathurâ-Bôdhisattva image of the year 33, above referred to, and still more that on the Kâman Buddha image dated in the year 74,^[2] should exhibit a further development in respect alike of script and of language. Here we find the ya in kya and sya regularly expressed by a loop, and not by its full sign.^[3] Thus it approaches visibly the form peculiar to the early Gupta period. The language of the later inscriptions, though not yet pure Sanskṛit, is decidedly more Sanskṛitic than that of the early Kushaṇa records. Compare, for instance, mâtâpitûṇâṁ (Kâman) with sahâ mâtâpitihi (Sârnâth-Mathurâ), and parigrahe (Kâman) with parigahe (Śrâvastî). On the other hand, we find pratishṭhâpita already in the Sârnâth inscription, whereas at an earlier period pratiṭhâpita is used.

The inscription is cut on three sides of the octagonal umbrella post, and consists of ten lines of 33 cm. in length, except the last line, which measures only 9 cm. The size of the aksharas varies from 1 to 6 cm. The letters are regular and clearly cut, but the disintegration of the surface of the stone has caused their shape to become indistinct in places, more especially towards the junction of the faces of the shaft. On the whole, however, the inscription is very well preserved, and wherever the reading appears at all doubtful, a comparison with contemporaneous epigraphs has enabled me to arrive at results which may be considered final.
___________________________________________________________

^[1] See Bühler, Ep. Ind. Vol. II. p. 199, No. II.
^[2] Bühler, ibid. p. 212, Plate, No. xlii. The image must belong to the reign of Vâsudêva. Compare V. A. Smith, J. R. A. S. for 1903, p. 12.
^[3]The looped ya is found already in the inscription of Kanishka’s 5th year, referred to above.