Page images
PDF
EPUB

But the latter hypothesis is not admissible on the ground that the difference between Satakarni I and Satakarni II is of about 36+10 years. The Nanaghat inscriptions of the early Satavahanas are "a little, not much later than Aśoka's and Dasaratha's edicts" (Bühler) and on epigraphical grounds "they are of the time of the last Mauryas or the earliest Sungas" that is, of the beginning of the second century B.C. (Bühler)1

Thus the date of Satakarni I. would also fit in with the date of Demetrios and Kharavela. It seems to be certain that Khāravela's time is between Demetrios and Menander (174-155 B.C.) and after a review of all available materials including the consideration of the second Asvamedha of Pushyamitra the chronology suggested above is more probable.2

Antiquity of Jainism

[ocr errors]

In line 12 it is clearly stated that King Nanda had taken away an "image (samnivesam) known as "the Jina of Kalinga", and that after the defeat of Bahasatimitra, the Kalinga emperor brought it back to Kalinga along with other trophies from Anga and Magadha. Carrying away idols of worship as a mark of trophy and also showing respect to the particular idol is known in later history. The datum proves (1) that Nanda was a Jaina and (2) that Jainism was introduced in Orissa very early, probably just after the Maha-vîra or in

1 A. S. W. I. V. 66.

• If later finds prove Brihaspati-mitra to have been one of the eight sons of Pushyamitra (see separate note), destroying the theory of his identity with Pushyamitra, the Greek invasion mentioned in this inscription will have to be taken to be a second one (under Menander) and the one mentioned by Patanjali to be referrable to Demetrics. But it seems very unlikely that these documents relate to two invasions and not to one and the same, and that Brihaspati-mitra and Pushyamitra are not identical. This speculation arises only when we ignore the reading Dimit-[i].. altogether. A photograph of the cast taken under a flashlight brings out clearly ti; the parts of the letter traces, viz. the bar and the righthand curve of t, which were not traceable owing to the white surface became visible at night. Di became undoubted. With Dimiti... I have no doubt as to the substantial correctnces of the chronology proposed above,

his time [the Jaina tradition mentions his visit to Orissa and line 14 of the inscription implies that the Kumārī Hill (Udayagiri) was a place where the religion had been preached and promulgated.] It also proves (3) that to have Jina images about or rather before 450 B.C. means that the date of Mahā-vîra's nirvāņa must be what we get from the various Jaina chronological data read with the Puranic and Påli materials which all harmonize in fixing it to be 545 B.C. (J.B.O.R.S., I., 99-105)1

Aira or Aila

In this [as well as in the Manchpuri inscription (E. I. XIII. 159, pl. II)] the akshara which has been taken as r has a suggestion of a left-side loop, resembling the loop of yet somewhat different from other lakāras of the record. The letter may be or . The suggestion is traceable in the cast and the impressions (see plate I to this article).

1 The date current in one of the Jaina sects is 18 years later which is Zue to the difference in taking the pre-coronation time of Vikrama into account (Ibid. 101).

"At present I have no available impression of Manchpuri and have to rely only on the plate in E.I. XIII. If the problem had been confined to Hathigumphā I would have read, on the materials, Aila and not Aira.

[graphic][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic]

III.-The Sunga Inscription of Ayodhya

By K. P. Jayaswal, M.A. (Oxon.)

1. The inscription is published in this Journal, Vol. X. p. 202. 2. Regarding the interpretation of Pushyamitrasya shashthena, a parallel use is found in the Raghuvamsa, XVI, verse 88:

लब्ध्वा बन्धु' तमपि च कुशः पञ्चमं तक्षकस्य ।

On this Mallinatha comments :

तक्षकस्य पञ्चमं पुत्रं तं कुमुदं बन्ध, लब्ध्वा ।

Panchamam Takshakasya," the 5th son of Takshaka", would justify the interpretation that Dhana was the sixth son of Pushyamitra.

3. The reading of the first word in the second line in view of a new impression is to be corrected:

dharma-rājñi (instead of dharma-rājnā) [see new plate published herewith.]

The relief portion shows that ñ has its long straight bar coming up to the headline of and in its upper portion there is a bifurcated line upwards, to the right, giving i-vowel sign (it is not a line arising from the middle stroke of j).

4. The slight change, however, produces a difference in meaning. The word refers to the queen of Dhana(deva) and not to himself. Dharma-rajni, like dharma-patni, will literally mean "the queen by sacrament," i.e., the lawful queen, the queen consort. Thus dharma-rājñi-pituḥ Phalgudevasya ketanam was a memorial to Phalgudeva, father of the queen consort (raised by Dhana..., the sixth son of the performer of two Asvamedha sacrifices the Senapati Pushyamitra, and the son of [the lady] Kausikî, the adhipati (king or ruler) of Kosala.1)

1 Kosaladhipena dviraśvamedhayājinah Senāpatch Pushyamitrasva shashthena Kausiki-putrena Dhana...dharmarajñi-pitah Phalgudevasya ketanam karitam.

« PreviousContinue »