We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
Sir John Marshall'S excavations have again brought important results. A new Kharoṣṭhī inscription has been found, which throws new light on the difficult question of the eras used in a series of Indian Kharoṣṭhī inscriptions belonging to the Pahlava and Kuṣāṇa periods. In May last Sir John was good enough to let me have excellent photographs of the new epigraph, for the purpose of editing it in the Epigraphia Indica. In consideration of its great importance, he has, moreover, kindly allowed me to publish a preliminary account in this Journal.
page 250 note 1 Read -satvaṇa.
page 250 note 2 JRAS., 1914, pp. 973 ff.
page 251 note 1 The Cambridge History of England, i, p. 582.
page 251 note 2 JRAS., 1914, p. 997.
page 251 note 3 “I mean, of course, excluding the fictitious Vikramāditya and Śālivāhana.”
page 251 note 4 p. 995.
page 253 note 1 Corpus, pp. cviii f. The word jaüva mentioned as a doublet of yavuga should be cancelled. As proposed by ProfessorThomas, , Gōttingische gelehrte Anzeigen, 1931, p. 6Google Scholar the final clause of the Patika inscription must be read as mahadanapati Patika saja uvajhae[na*] Rohiṇimitreṇa ya ima[mi] saṃgharame navakamika, the great gift-lord Patika together with the upādhyāya Rohiṇīmitra, who is overseer of works in this Saṃgharāma. Professor Thomas explains saja as sadya, and translates “at present upādhyāya“, but it seems more probable that saja is Vedic sacā, which Professor Rapson has traced in the Kharoṣṭhī documents from Turkestan. Cf. his remark in the Index Verborum, s.v. ṯaca.
page 254 note 1 I.c., p. 4, see Plate XVId of the Corpus.
page 254 note 2 Corpus, No. ix.
page 256 note 1 Cf. Corpus, No. viii.
page 256 note 2 Corpus, No. xi.
page 256 note 3 Corpus, No. ix.
page 256 note 4 JRAS., 1914, p. 986.
page 256 note 5 Ind, Ant., xxxvii, 1908, p. 67.
page 256 note 6 JBORS., xvi, p. 240.
page 256 note 7 The Cambridge History of India, i, p. 570.
page 258 note 1 See the references Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, II, i, pp. liii ff.
page 259 note 1 Cf. Rapson, , The Cambridge History of India, i, pp. 458 and 568Google Scholar.
page 259 note 2 Otherwise Rapson, l.c., p. 568.
page 259 note 3 JBAS., 1906, pp. 193 f., cf. Rapson, I.e., p. 561.
page 260 note 1 l.c, p. 582.
page 260 note 2 JBAS., 1914, pp. 977 f.
page 261 note 1 T'oung Pao, II, viii, pp. 149 ff.
page 263 note 1 Annual Report Arch. Surv., 1911–12, pp. 120 ff.
page 263 note 2 JBORS., vi, pp. 12 ff.
page 263 note 3 JA., ix, i, 1897, p. 26; cf. Boyer, , JA., ix, xv, 1900, p. 549Google Scholar.
page 263 note 4 JRAS., 1913, p. 987.
page 264 note 1 e.g., Corpus, p. lxvii.
page 264 note 2 SBAW., 1912, p. 830.
