|
The Indian Analyst
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA assigned to it by Bühler in the expression hetuvatâ-châ viyaṁjanate-cha (rock edict III.), ‘ both according to the letter and according to the spirit.’ The sense attached to it by M. Senart in the Rûpnâth edict is evidently the one to be applied here also. The Sârnâth inscription, moreover, places it beyond doubt that M. Senart’s reading of the corresponding passage in that edict is correct.[1] The original meaning of vyañjana is ‘ manifestation,’ from which that of ‘ a royal proclamation ’ can be easily derived. In connection with the Rûpnâth legend this interpretation seems to me preferable to that suggested above by Dr. Bloch. Vivâsayâtha is the 2nd Plur. Imper. of vivâseti. Compare vivasetavaya in the Rûpnâth edict, which M. Senart[2] translates :─ ‘ il vous faut partir en mission.’ But as in the Sârnâth inscription apparently no reference is made to missionary duties, I feel inclined to assign to it a more ‘ to conduct oneself,’ a meaning which could be derived from that of ‘ to spend one’s time ’ attached to Skr. vivasati. That, in any case, vivâsayâtha, though a causative in form, can hardly have a causative meaning, appears from the following vivâsâpayâthâ (l. 11), the 2nd Pers. Plur. Imper. of a verb vivâsâpeti which can be nothing but a causative of vivâseti. This prevents me from accepting the interpretation suggested by Dr. Bloch. L. 11, koṭa-visavesu.─ Prof. Kern agrees with me in explaining visavesu as the equivalent of Skr. vishayêshu and quotes the following parallel cases : ussâva = avaśyâya ; pavachchhati, v. l. pavechchhati=prayachchhati ; tâvatiṁsa = trayastriṁśa ; kulâvaka = kulâyaka ; kâsâva = kâshâya. In the Aśôka inscriptions we have âvuti (pillar edict IV.) = Skr. âyukti, and the terminations of the 3rd Pers. Sing. and Plur. Opt. ºva (Skr. ºyât) and ºvu (Skr. ºyur), e.g. pâpova (pillar edict IV.) =Skr. prâpnuyât.
It is more difficult to explain koṭa. Prof. Kern proposes to render the compound either by ‘ territory belonging to the resort of a capital ’ or by ‘ rural district,’ as in Tamil kôṭṭam has the meaning of ‘ an agricultural town or village.’ I have translated it as a dvandva compound. That kôta, ‘ a fort,’ can be used to designate a fortified city, is evident from place-names like Nagar-kôṭ (i.e. Kâṅgṛâ city) and Paṭhân-kôṭ (for Pratishṭhâna-kôṭa). e, f. ─ Additional inscriptions on the Aśôka pillar. Besides the Aśôka edict, the Sârnâth pillar contains two records of a later date, each consisting of only one line. The older of the two (i.e) is incised partly beneath the Aśôka inscription, continuing, as it were, its last short line. Though the engraving of the letters, which measure from 1 to 7 cm., is inferior to that of the principal record, there can be little doubt about the reading, with the exception of the first word which is partly destroyed. The length of the line, as far as preserved, is exactly 1 m. I read it as follows :[3] . . . . . rpârigeyhe rajña Aśvaghoshasya chatariśe savachhare hematapakhe prathame divase dasame. “ [In the fortunate reign] of Râjan Aśvaghôsha, in the fortieth year, in the first fortnight of winter, on the tenth day.”
It will be seen that the sign for anusvâra is omitted throughout (read : chatariṁśe,
saṁvachhare, hemaṁtapakhe), and that the long â of râjña and chatâri[ṁ]śe is not indicated,
unless the very slight extension to the proper left of the top of r and l is meant to serve that
purpose. It is probable that at the beginning there was some expression equivalent to the
vardhamâna-kalyâṇa-vijaya-râjyê of later inscriptions.[4]
[1] See Senart, Les Inscriptions de Piyadasi (Paris, 1886), Vol. II. pp. 169 ff. and 193 f.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|