गुप्त अभिलेख संग्रह (जे. एफ. फ्लीट - गुप्त सम्राटों एवं परवर्ती नरेशों के ऐतिहासिक पाषाण व ताम्रलेख)

194 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
into the next line; intermediate divisions, rendered unavoidable here and there by printing
necessities have been made only where absolutely necessary for neatness in the arrange-
ment of the Texts.
A double hyphen is used to separate words in a sentence, which in the original are
written as one word, being joined together by the euphonic rules of saṁdhi. Where this
double hyphen is used, it is to be understood that a final consonant, and the following initial
vowel or consonant-and-vowel, are in the original expressed by one complex sign. Where it
is not used, it is to be understood of the orthography of the original, that, according to the
stage of the alphabet, the final consonant either has the modified broken form, which, in
the oldest stages of the alphabet, was used to indicate a consonant with no vowel attached
to it, or has the distinct sign of the virāma attached to it; and that the following initial
vowel or consonant has its full initial form. In the transcription of ordinary texts, the
double hyphen is probably unnecessary; except where there is the saṁdhi of final and
initial vowels. But, in the transcription of epigraphical records, the use of this sign is
unavoidable, for the purpose of indicating exactly the palæographical standard of the ori-
ginal texts.
The avagraha, or sign which indicates the elision of an initial a, is but rarely to be
met with in inscriptions, and does not occur at all in the present series. Where it does
occur, I find it most convenient to represent it by its own Dêvanâgarî sign.
So also, practice has shewn that it is more convenient to use the ordinary Dêvanâgarî
marks of punctuation; than to substitute the English signs for them.
Ordinary brackets are used for corrections and doubtful points; and square
brackets, for letters which are damaged and partially illegible in the original, or which,
being wholly illegible, can be supplied with certainty. An asterisk attached to letters or
marks of punctuation in square brackets, indicates that those letters or marks of punctuation
were omitted altogether in the original. As a rule, it is more convenient to use the brackets,
than to have recourse to footnotes; as the points to which attention is to be drawn, attract
notice far more readily. But notes are given instead, when there would be so many
brackets, close together, as to encumber the text and render it inconvenient to read. When
any letters in the original are wholly illegible and cannot be supplied, they are represented,
in metrical passages, by the sign for a long or a short syllable, as the case may be; and,
in prose passages, by points, at the rate, usually, of two for each akshara or syllable.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS.
TEXTS AND TRANSLATIONS.
No. 1; PLATE I.
ALLAHABAD POSTHUMOUS STONE PILLAR INSCRIPTION
OF SAMUDRAGUPTA.
THIS inscription appears to have been first brought to the notice of the public in 1834,
when, in the Journal of the Bengal Asiatic Society, Vol. III. p. 118 ff., Captain
A. Troyer published his reading of the text and a translation of it, accompanied by a lithograph
(id. Plate vi.), which was reduced by Mr. James Prinsep from a copy commenced by a
brother of Lieutenant T. S. Burt, of the Engineers, finished by a Munshî, and revised
by Lieutenant Burt himself.—In the same volume, p. 257 ff., the Revd. Dr. W. H. Mill,
working from the same lithograph, published a revised version of the text and transla-
tion; followed, at p. 339 ff., by a supplementary paper containing the first genealogical tree
of the dynasty. His version, however, though it was an improvement on that of Captain
Troyer, still fell very far short of exhibiting the original completely or accurately;
especially in his failing, like Captain Troyer, to recognise that the inscription is a posthu-
mous one; in his misreading lines 11 and 21, in such a way as to introduce into the trans-
lation and genealogical tree, without any foundation whatever in the original, the indepen-
dent princess Saṁhârikâ, with a daughter, name unknown, who was the wife of Samudra-
gupta, other mothers-in-law of the same king, and a royal issue expected at the date
of the inscription; and in his treatment of line 30, where, instead of âchakshâṇa iva bhuvo
bâhur=ayam=uchchhritaḥ stambhaḥ, "this lofty column (is) as it were an arm of the earth,
proclaiming (the fame of Samudragupta)," he read rôma-charmaṇaḥ ravi-bhuvô bâhur=
ayam=uchchhritaḥ stambhaḥ, and translated "of this child of the Sun, though clothed
in hairy flesh, this lofty pillar is the arm," which led him to refer Samudragupta and his
dynasty to the Solar Race, a mistake that sometimes seems to have been not even yet
completely eradicated.—In 1837, in the same Journal, Vol. VI. p. 969 ff., Mr. James Prinsep
gave a fresh and much improved lithograph of the inscription and its alphabet (id. Plate lv.),
reduced from impressions on cloth and paper made by Captain Edward Smith, of the
Engineers; and, with it, his own version of the text and translation.¹ His rendering of
the inscription still failed to represent the original with any real approach to accuracy and
completeness. But it was a very great improvement on the two versions that had pre-
ceded it; especially in avoiding the leading mistakes of Dr. Mill, pointed out above.
And it has remained the standard version up to the present time; except that in 1872
¹ The translation is reprinted in Mr. Thomas' edition of Prinsep's Essays on Indian Antiquities,
Vol. I. p. 233 ff.
B₁

2 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
in the Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. IX. p. cxcvi. ff.,
Dr. Bhau Daji notified, from a copy on cloth made by Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji, some
corrections in the historical part, in the names of the kings and countries conquered by
Samudragupta.¹
The round monolith sandstone column, thirty-five feet in height, on which this inscrip-
tion is, dates from the third century B.C., as is shewn by the famous edicts of Aśôka on it. It
now stands in a conspicuous position inside the Fort at Allahâbâd (properly Ilâhâbâd), the
seat of Government of the North-West Provinces. It is doubtful, however, whether the
column was originally erected at this place, or whether, as has been suggested by General
Cunningham,² it was first set up at the ancient Kauśâmbî, now represented by the village
of Kôsam³ on the left bank of the Jamnâ, about twenty-eight miles west by south from
Allahâbâd; and, being still at that place when the present inscription was engraved,
was afterwards moved from there to Allahâbâd by one of the early Musalmân kings
of Dehli, just as the two Aśôka columns now at Dehli were brought there from original
positions at Mêraṭh and in the Siwâlik hills. The points in favour of the latter supposi-
tion are (1) that the column contains a short Aśôka edict addressed to the rulers of
Kauśâmbî;⁴ and (2) that the Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsiang makes no mention of this
column in his account of Po-lo-ye-kia, i.e. Prayâga or Allahâbâd.⁵
The writing, which covers a space of about 6′ 8″ broad by 5′ 4″ high, commences on
the north of the column, towards the north-east, and in the longest part, line 30, runs all
round the column, except for a space of about 1′ 9.″ The bottom line is about 6′ 0″ above
the point where the column starts from its present pedestal. There is a large crack in the
column, from above the first word of the first line, and extending down to the beginning
of the fourteenth. And the upper part of the inscription has suffered very much, partly
from some of the mediæval inscriptions, which are so abundant on the column, being
engraved on and between the original lines here, and partly from the peeling off of the
surface of the stone in several places. But nothing of a historical nature appears to have
been lost; except, perhaps, after the mention of Nâgasêna in line 13, and in connection
with the mention of Pushpapura in line 14. A few letters, again, have been damaged or
destroyed by the peeling off of the stone near the beginning of line 23, and in the centre
of lines 23, 24, 31, and 32; but, except in line 32, the letters can be supplied without
any doubt. The really important part of the inscription, the historical and genealogical
passages commencing with line 19 and ending in line 30, is fortunately in a state of
¹ This notice was published in 1872; but it was read before the Society two years earlier, on
the 11th August 1870. It records that Dr. Bhau Daji submitted to the Society a revised facsimile,
text, and translation, of the inscription; but they do not appear to have been ever published, or to be
now forthcoming. His suggestions were perhaps more correct in his own notes, than in the form in
which they stand printed in the Journal.
² Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol. I. p. 39.
³ The ‘Kosam and Kosim Kheraj’ of maps; about eight miles to the south of Karârî, the chief
town of the Karârî Parganâ in the Manjhanpur or Mânjhandpur Tahsîl or Sub-Division of the Allah-
âbâd District. . Indian Atlas, Sheet No. 88. Lat. 25° 20′ N.; Long. 81° 27′ E.
⁴ Corp. Inscr. Indic. Vol. I. pp. 39, 116, 141, and Pl. xxii.; see also after the end of line 10 of
the present inscription in the Plate now published.
⁵ Beal's Buddhist Records of the Western World, Vol. I. p. 230 ff.; Stanislas Julien's Hiouen
Thsang, Vol. II. p. 276 ff.—At the same time, it must be noted that Hiuen Tsiang also makes no
mention of any such column in his immediately following account of Kiau-shang-mi or Kauśâmbî.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; No. 1, PLATE I. 3

excellent preservation, and is decipherable without the slightest doubt from beginning to
end.—The size of the letters (by which I mean, here and throughout, the height of such
letters as cha, da, pa, ma, ba, va, &c., which are formed entirely within the limits of, so
to speak, the lines of writing, without any projections above or below) varies from ⁷/₁₆" to
¼". As regards the palæography of this and the other inscriptions in the volume, this
division of the subject is so extensive as to require a separate treatise to itself; and I can-
not here do more than touch in a general way on such special points as call for particular
notice. The characters of the present inscription belong to what it has been customary to
call the Gupta Alphabet. This, however, like all other similar dynastic appellations, is an
unsatisfactory and misleading term. In the first place, these characters were not confined
to the inscriptions of the Early Gupta dynasty; for they were used, with slight modifica-
tions, but not such as to affect their essential nature, on the coins of the later Indo-
Scythian kings of the Pañjâb. Even in respect of a character of such leading importance
as the letter m,—though some of these coins exhibit what is called the Indo-Scythic
form,¹ in distinction from the m of the northern Gupta inscriptions, yet, on one coin which I
had the advantage of examining in General Cunningham's collection, and which has on it
the name of Samudra,² the m that is used is the so-called Gupta m, somewhat later
than the m of the present inscription, but of exactly the same shape with the m of
mahârâja in line 8 (to choose a clear example) of the Mathurâ inscription of Chandra-
gupta II., No. 4 below, Plate iiiA. And in the second place, the inscriptions of the Early
Guptas themselves were by no means written exclusively in this alphabet. To say nothing
of the frequent use of the Indo-Scythic m on Samudragupta's coins,—illustrated, for

¹ Setting aside the few exceptional instances that we have of irregular usage, confined, I think,
entirely to coins, this letter is in itself sufficient to shew, for the whole period covered by the
inscriptions in this volume, whether the characters of a particular record belong to the northern or to the
southern class of alphabets. The m of the Indo-Scythic inscriptions, a good representation of which
may be seen in the word mahârâjasya at the beginning of the Mathurâ inscription of Huvishka of the
year 39 (Archæol. Surv. Ind. Vol. III. Pl. xiv. No. 1), is simply a stiff angular development of the m
of the Aśôka period. This particular form was not confined, however, to the Indo-Scythian records.
We have it, in all its angularity, in the word svâmi in the Sâñchi pillar inscription, No. 73 below, Plate
xliiA.; and, with very little modification, in the early inscriptions from Nâsik and that neighbourhood
published in the Archæol. Surv. West. Ind. Vol. IV. Plates xliv. ff. And in the slightly modified form,
with simply the angles rounded off, which it must have had in the earliest stages of development of the
southern alphabets, we have it throughout the Sâñchi inscription of Chandragupta II., No. 5 below,
Plate iiiB., e.g. in mahâvihârê, line 1; the Gaṅgdhâr inscription of Viśvavarman, No. 17 below, Plate x.,
e.g. in appratimêna, line 4; and the Mandasôr inscription of Kumâragupta and Bandhuvarman, No. 18
below, Plate xi., e.g. in bhavanam=idam=udâraṁ, line 23. While, in a more modified form, which
must have been of later development, though the instances in this volume happen to be of earlier date,
we have it throughout the Êraṇ inscription of Samudragupta, No. 2 below, Plate ii.A, e.g. in samara,
line 21; and throughout the Udayagiri cave inscription of Chandragupta II. of the year 82, No. 3 below,
Plate iiB., e.g. in mahârâja, at the beginning of line 2.—The m of the inscription now under notice
must also be simply a development of the Aśôka m, arrived at by forming the left part of the letter in
a different way, viz. by one unbroken movement, leading gradually to its being separated entirely from
the right part, which then eventually assumed a straight form, instead of curved. And, though the
instances in this volume happen to be of later date, undoubtedly the form that we have in, for
instance, mahârâja, in line 8 of the Mathurâ inscription of Chandragupta II., No. 4 below, Plate iiiA.,
must have preceded the form used in the inscription now under notice.
² The three components of the name are written one above the other, inside the spear and under
the left arm of the king, on the obverse; and they are practically identical with the components of the
same name on the coin of Samudragupta given by Mr. V. A. Smith in Jour. Beng. As. Soc. Vol. LIII.
Part I. Pl. ii. No. 6.

B 2.

4 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM VOL. III
instance, by the coins given by Mr. V. A. Smith in the Jour. Beng. As. Soc. Vol. LIII.
Part I. Plate ii. Nos. 3, 7, 9, 10, and 11,—we meet with at least two perfectly distinct
alphabets in their inscriptions, in addition to the one now under notice. The Êraṇ inscrip-
tion of Samudragupta, No. 2 below, Plate iiA., and the Udayagiri cave inscription of
Chandragupta II. of the year 82, No. 3 below, Plate iiB., are in a 'box-headed' and 'nail-
headed' variety of the Central India alphabet, which has hitherto been called the Nerbudda
Alphabet and the Vâkâṭaka Alphabet, and which, in addition to the very distinctive form of
m, has all the leading characteristics of the southern alphabets. The Sâñchi inscription
of Chandragupta II., again, No. 5 below, Plate iiiB., is distinctly in the characters of the
southern alphabets. And the Junâgaḍh rock inscription of Skandagupta is in a somewhat
later modification of the Saurâshṭra or Kâṭhiâwâḍ alphabet, exhibited with all its leading
characteristics in the inscription of Rudradâman, on the same rock, of which we have a
lithograph in the Archæol. Surv. West. Ind. Vol. II. p. 128, Plate xiv. It is perfectly plain
that the alphabets varied, not according to dynasties, but according to localities; and, in
establishing any system of comparative palæography, we must select territorial, not dynas-
tic, names. I would propose calling the alphabet of the inscription now under notice, the
general North India Alphabet of the fourth century A.D. The characters include two letters
which, after the Pâli period, lay for a long time in disuse in the southern alphabets, and
were not revived for a considerable time after the present period; viz. the lingual ḍ, as distinct
from the dental d, exhibited in krîḍatâ, line 14, ḍavâka, line 22, and vrîḍita, line 27;
and the lingual ḍh, exhibited in virûḍha, line 18. On the other hand, in the ḷ which
occurs in vyâluḷita, line 8, kaurâḷaka for kairaḷaka, line 19, saimhaḷaka, line 23, and laḷita,
lines 27 and 30, they include a letter which properly belongs exclusively to the southern
alphabets and languages; and its occurrence here seems to furnish an unconscious piece of
evidence to the effect that some, at least, of the conquests attributed to Samudragupta in the
south of India, were actual facts; in the other inscriptions in this volume, this letter occurs
only in the word aḷi, 'a bee,' in line 1 of the Tuśâm rock inscription, No. 67 below, Plate
xlA. In śôbhâ, line 18, vishṇugôpa, line 19, and gô-śata, line 25, the vowel ô is formed
in rather a peculiar way, which, so far as the right-hand stroke is concerned, is followed also in
the vowel â as attached to the same consonants, e.g. in śâsana, lines 23 and 24, and
gâṅgam, line 31. In respect of r in combination with a following y, we have to notice that,
as in the case of other consonants, the y is doubled, and the r is written above the line, e.g.
in vîryya, line 13; whereas, in a somewhat later development of this alphabet in Central
India, it became the custom, as in the case of y in conjunction with other letters, to write
the r on the line, with a single y attached below it, e.g. in maryâdayâ, line 6-7, and kuryat,
line 12, of the Majhgawâm plates of the Mahârâja Hastin, No. 23 below, Plate xiv. The
characters also include, in the numbering of the verses, forms of the numerical symbols
for 3, 4, and 8; the intervening symbols are destroyed.—The language is Sanskrit; and
the inscription is in verse as far as the end of line 16, and the rest in prose.—In respect of
orthography, the only points that call for notice are (1) the doubling of k, in conjunction
with a following r, e.g. in parâkkrama, line 17, kkriyâ, lines 27 and 28, and vikkrama, line
30; (2) the doubling of dh (by d, as required by the rules), in conjunction with a following
y and v, in addhyêya, line 16, and sâddhv-asâddhu, line 25; and (3) the use of the south-
ern ḷ, in the instances pointed out a few lines above.
The inscription is non-sectarian, being devoted entirely to a recital of the glory,
conquests, and descent, of the Early Gupta king Samudragupta. It is not dated;
but, as it describes Samudragupta as deceased, it belongs to the time of his son and

successor Chandragupta II., and must have been engraved soon after the accession of
the latter. Its great value lies in the abundant information which, in the conquests
attributed to Samudragupta, it gives us as to the divisions of India, its tribes, and its
kings, about the middle of the fourth century A.D. This, however, is a subject for
detailed treatment in the historical chapters which will form the second part of this
volume.
In connection with Samudragupta, there is mentioned, in line 14, a city named
Pushpapura, which is spoken of in such a way as to indicate apparently that it was his
capital. Pushpapura, Pushpapurî, and Kusumapura, all meaning ‘the town or city
of flowers,’ were names of Pâṭaliputra, which is now represented by the modern Paṭna
in Bihâr, on the Ganges; the original city, Pâṭaliputra itself, stood on the opposite south
bank of the river, at the place where, in ancient times, the Sôn used to flow into it. The
antiquity of the name Kusumapura is vouched for by Hiuen Tsiang,¹ who speaks of the
city under both names,—K‘u-su-mo-pu-lo, or Keu-su-mo-pu-lo, which he also explains by
the Chinese Hwa-kong or Hwa-kung, ‘flower-palace,’ and Hiang-hu-kong-sh‘ing, ‘city or
royal precinct of the scented flower;’ and Po-ch‘a-li-tsu-ch‘ing, ‘the city of Pâṭaliputra.’
He tells us that Kusumapura was the more ancient name of the two. And, though I
cannot find any early authority for it apart from the present passage, there is no reason
for declining to think that the synonym Pushpapura was in use in early days, quite as
much as it was at the time when the Daśakumâracharita and other books, which give us
this form and Pushpapurî, were written. This passage, therefore, may furnish good
grounds for locating Samudragupta’s capital at Pâṭaliputra. At the same time, I
have to draw attention to the following points, as requiring consideration in determining
this question. (1) Until the time of Skandagupta, no inscriptions of this dynasty have
been found anywhere in the neighbourhood of Pâṭaliputra.² (2) Though Pâṭaliputra is
mentioned, under its own proper name, in two of the inscriptions³ of Chandragupta II.,
yet neither of these passages connects the city with him, as his capital. And (3) Hìuen
Tsiang⁴ mentions another ancient Kusumapura,—for which the synonym Pushpapura
would be equally acceptable,—far distant, and quite distinct, from Pâṭaliputra. He tells us
that the old capital of Kânyâkubja, or Kanauj, was originally called Kusumapura.
And, though he is not absolutely specific on the point, yet the way in which he describes
how the town came to be invested with the name of Kânyâkubja, seems to indicate that
he understood Kusumapura to be the ancient name of the very site which, in his time,
was called Kânyâkubja. A capital here, or anywhere in this neighbourhood, would be
far more in accordance with the localities at which all the earlier inscriptions of the
dynasty exist; and still more so with the selection of a column either at Allâhâbâd or
at Kauśâmbî, to contain the record of the conquests of Samudragupta, by whom the
power of the family was brought to maturity and was placed on an extensive footing. It
is a matter for regret that the last pâda of the verse that mentions Pushpapura, is so
hopelessly illegible; it evidently contained a reference to some river, which might have
¹ Buddh. Rec. West. World, Vol. II. p. 83 ff.
² I exclude intentionally, of course, the spurious Gayâ grant of Samudragupta, No. 60 below,
Plate xxxvii.
³ The Udayagiri cave inscription, No. 6 below, Plate ivA. l. 4; and the Gaḍhwâ inscription of
the year 88, No. 7, Plate ivB. l. 12.
⁴ Buddh. Rec. West. World, Vol. I. p. 207.

6 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
made the point quite clear. As it is, we must look for the clue in the identification of the
Kôta family, tribe, or dynasty, which is mentioned in the same verse But, for this
name, I have not as yet succeeded in obtaining any other reference.
TEXT.¹
1 [Yah²] kulyaiḥ svai . . . . . . . . âtasa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2 ya(?)sya(?) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [॥*] [1]
3 Pu(?)ṁv . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
tra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4 sphâ(?)ra-dva(?) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . kshaḥ sphuṭ-
ôddhva[rṁ]sita . . . . . . . . . . pravitata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [॥*] [2]
5 Yasya³ prajñ-ânushaṅg-ôchita-sukha-manasaḥ śâstra-tattv-ârttha-bharttuḥ [— —]
stabdh-ô[‿ ‿ ‿ ‿]ni[‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ —]n-ôchchhri[— — ‿ — —]
6 [sa]t-kâvya-śrî-virôdhân=budha-guṇita-guṇ-âjñ-âhatân=êva kṛitvâ v[i]dval-lôkê
vi[— —]sphuṭa-bahu-kavitâ-kîrtti-râjyaṁ bhunakti [॥*] 3
7 [Â]ryyô⁴ h-îty=upaguhya bhâva-piśunair-utkarṇṇitai rômabhiḥ sabhyêsh=
ûchchhavasitêshu tulyakulaja-mlân-ânan-ôdvîkshi[ta]ḥ
8 sn[ê]ha-vyâluḷitêna bâshpa-guruṇâ tattv-êkshiṇâ chakshushâ yaḥ pitr=
âbhihitô ni[r]îksh[y]a nikhilâṁ pâhy=êva]m=[u]rv[v]îm-iti [॥*] 4
9 [Dṛi]shṭvâ⁵ karmmâṇy=anêkâny=amanuja-sadṛiśâny=adbhut-ôdbhinna-harshâ
bh[â*]vair=âsvâdaya[— ‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ — — ‿ — — ‿ ‿] [kê]chit
10 vîryy-ôttaptâś=cha kêchich=chharaṇam=upagatâ yasya vṛittê praṇâmê=
py=art[t]ê(?)[— ‿ ‿ ‿ — — ‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ — — ‿] [॥*] [5]
11 Saṁgrâmêshu⁶ sva-bhuja-vijitâ nityam=uchch-âpakârâḥ śvaḥ-śvô mâna-
pra[‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ — — ‿ — ‿ ‿ ‿ — —]
12 tôsh-ôttuṅgaiḥ sphuṭa-bahu-rasa-snêha-phullair=mmanôbhiḥ paśchâttâpaṁ
va[‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ — —]ma[ṁ(?)] sy[â]d=vasa(?)nta[m(?)] [॥*] [6]
13 Udvêl’-ôdita-bâhu-vîryya-rabhasâd=êkêna yêna kshaṇâd=unmûly=Âchyuta-
Nâgasêna-g[‿ ‿ — — — — ‿ ‿ —]
14 daṇḍair=grâhayat=aiva Kôta-kula-jaṁ Pushp-âhvayê krîḍatâ sûryyê
nê[‿ ‿ ‿ — ‿ —]taṭa[‿ — — — ‿ ‿ ‿ ‿ —] [॥*] [7]
15 Dharmma⁷-prâchîra-bandhaḥ śaśi-kara-śuchayaḥ kîrttayaḥ sa-pratânâ vaidu-
shyaṁ tattva-bhêdi praśama[‿ ‿ ‿]uku[—]y k[‿]mu(?)t[—‿]t-ârttham(?)
16 addhyêyaḥ sûkta-mârggaḥ kavi-mati-vibhav-ôtsâraṇaṁ ch=âpi kâvyaṁ kô nu
syâd=yô=sya na syâd=guṇa-mat:-v[i]dushâṁ dhyâna-pâtram ya êkaḥ [॥*] 8
17 Tasya vividha-samara-śat-âvataraṇa-dakshasya sva-bhuja-bala-parâkkram-aika-
bandhôḥ parakkrâm-âṅkasya paraśu-śara-śaṅku-śakti-prâs-âsi-tômara-
¹ From the original column.
² The first four lines, containing the first two verses, are almost entirely destroyed; and the few
letters that remain of them do not suffice to shew what the metres were.
³ Metre, Sragdharâ. ⁴ Metre, Śârdûlavikrîḍita.
⁵ Metre, Sragdharâ. ⁶ Metre, Mandâkrântâ.
⁷ Metre, Śârdûlavikrîḍita. ⁸ Metre, Sragdharâ.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; No. 1, PLATE I. 7
18 bhindipâla-n[â]râcha - vaitastik - âdy - anêka - praharaṇa - virûḍh - âkula - vraṇa - śat - âṅka -
śôbhâ-samuday-ôpachita-kântatara-varshmaṇaḥ
19 Kausalaka-Mahêndra-Mâh[â*]kântâraka-Vyâghrarâja-Kaurâḷaka¹ - Maṇ-
ṭarâja-Paishṭapuraka-Mahêndra-giriKauṭṭûraka-Svâmidatt²-Airaṇḍa-
pallaka-Damana-Kâñchêyaka-Vishṇugôp-Âvamuktaka-
20 Nîlarâja-Vaiṅgêyaka-Hastivarmma-Pâlakkak-Ôgrasêna - Daivarâshṭraka-
Kubêra-Kausthalapuraka-Dhanañjaya - prabhṛiti-sarvva - dakshiṇâpatha-
râja-grahaṇa - môksh - ânugraha-janita-pratâp-ônmiśra-mahâbhagyasya
21 Rudradêva-Matila-Nâgadatta-Chandravarmma - Gaṇapatinâga - Nâgasên-
Âchyuta-Nandi-Balavarmm-âdy-anêk-Âryyâvartta-râja - prasabh - ôddharaṇ-
ôdvritta-prabhâva-mahataḥ parichârakîkṛita-sarvv-âṭavika-râjasya

¹ Read kairaḷaka, for which the word in the text is obviously a mistake.—The text, as it stands,
would give "the country, or city, of Kurâḷa;" but, though kurâla occurs in the sense of 'a light bay horse
with black legs,' it is not known as the name of a country or a city. Kêraḷa, on the other hand, is
so well known as one of the countries in the south of India, that it would be strange if it were omitted
in a passage like the present one; and it is easy to see how the engraver, or perhaps the writer from
whose draft he engraved, formed kaurâḷaka, by mistake for kairaḷaka, through a stroke on the right
of the top of the k in kai and of the ra.
² This is not altogether an easy passage to deal with. In the first instance,—coming imme-
diately after the mention of the city of Pishṭapura, which is the modern Piṭṭâpuram (the 'Pittapooram'
of the Indian Atlas, Sheet No. 94; Lat. 17° 6'; Long. 82° 18'), the chief town of the Piṭṭâpuram
Zamîndârî or Estate, twelve miles north by east of 'Cocanada' in the Gôdâvarî District in the Madras
Presidency,—the syllables mahêndragiri suggest at once a reference to the famous Mahêndra moun-
tain in the Gañjâm District, among the Eastern Ghauts, the 'Mahendrogiri' of maps (Indian Atlas,
Sheet No. 108; Lat. 18° 58' N.; Long. 84° 26' E.), which is mentioned in other early inscrip-
tions; for instance, as Mahêndrâchala, in lines 1 and 3 of the two 'Chicacole' grants of the Mahârâja
Indravarman (Ind. Ant. Vol. XIII. pp. 120, 123). And this tempts us to divide the passage thus,
Paishṭapuraka-MahêndragiriKauṭṭûraka-Svâmidatta, and to translate "Svâmidatta of Pishṭapura
and of Koṭṭûra on Mahêndragiri."—Another rendering that might suggest itself is "Svâmidatta of
Pishṭapura, Mahêndragiri, and Koṭṭûra:" which, in fact, except in respect of his mistake of Kudura, for
Koṭṭûra, was adopted by Dr. Bhau Daji (Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. IX. p. cxcviii.) But this is
not admissible, because it would require mahêndragirika in the text, instead of mahêndragiri; and,
though it is possible to find the final ka in the text as it stands, yet this would give us as the next
word, instead of Koṭṭûra (Koṭṭûr), which is a Drâviḍian name of frequent occurrence, Oṭṭûr, for which
I can find no authority at all, or Hoṭṭûr (if we assume an omission of the initial h), which occurs,
but not in connection with any place of importance.—If mahêndragiri is to be taken as one
word, and as denoting the mountain, the translation that I have noted above is the one that must be
adopted. And it might be supported by the fact that we have a Koṭṭûr on almost the same range of
hills as that to which the Mahêndragiri belongs; viz. the 'Kailaskotta and Kylascottah' of the map
(Indian Atlas, Sheet No. 107: Lat. 19° 14'; Long. 83° 36' E.), which represents Kailâsa-Koṭṭa or Kailâsa-
[

8 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
22 Samataṭa-Dāvâka-Kâmarûpa-Nêpâla-Karttṛipur-âdi-pratyanta-nṛipatibhir
Mmâlav-Ârjunâyana-Yaudhêya-Mādrak-Âbhîra-Prârjuna-Sanakâ-
nîka¹-Kâka-Kharaparik-âdibhiś-cha sarvvakaradân-ājñākaraṇa-praṇāmâ-
gamana-
23 paritôshita-prachaṇḍa-śāsanasya anêka-bhrashṭa-rājyôtsanna-râjavaṁśa-pratishṭhâ-
pan-ôdbhūta-nikhila-bh[uva]na-vicha[ra]ṇa-śānta-yaśasaḥ Daivaputra-Shāhi-
Shāhānushāhi-Śaka-Muruṇḍaiḥ Saimhalak-âdibhiś=cha
24 sarvva-dvîpa-vâsibhir-âtmanivêdana-kanyôpâyanadâna-garutmadaṅka-svavishayabhu-
kti-śāsana[y]âchan-âdy-upâya-sêvâ-kṛita-bâhu-vîryya-prasara-dharaṇi-bandhasya
pri(pṛi)thivyâm=a-pratirathasya
25 sucharita-śat-âlaṅkṛit-ânêka-guṇa-gaṇ-ôtsiktibhiś-charaṇa-tala-pramṛishṭ-ânya-nara-
pati-kîrttēḥ sâddhv-asâdh-ûdaya-pralaya-hêtu-purushasy-â-chintyasya bhakty-
avanati-mâtra-grâhya-mṛidu-hṛidayasy-ânukampâvatô-nêka-gô-śata-sahasra-pra-
dâyinaḥ²
26 kṛipaṇa-dîn-ânâth-âtura-jan-ôddharaṇa-sa(ma)ntradîksh-âdy-upagata-manasaḥ sa-
middhasya vigrahavatô lôk-ânugrahasya Dhanada-Varuṇ-Êndr-Ântaka-
samasya sva-bhuja-bala-vijit-ânêka-narapati-vibhava-pratyarppaṇâ-nitya-vyâpṛit-
âyuktapurushasya
27 niśita-vidagdha-mati-gândharvva-lalitair=vrîḍita-tridaśapatiguru-Tumburu-Nârad-
âdêr=vvidvaj-jan-ôpajîvy-ânêka-kâvya-kkriyâbhiḥ pratishṭhita-kavirâja-śabdasya
suchira-stôtavy-ânêk-âdbhut-ôdâra-charitasya
28 lôka-samaya-kkriy-ânuvidhâna-mâtra-mânushasya lôka-dhâmnô dêvasya mahâ-
râja-śrî-Gupta³-prapautrasya mahârâja-śrî-Ghaṭôtkacha-pautrasya mahâ-
râjâdhirâja-śrî-Chandragupta-putrasya
29 Lichchhavi-dauhitrasya mahâdêvyâṁ Kumāradêvyâm-utpha(tpa)nnasya
mahârâjâdhirâja-śrî-Samudraguptasya sarvva-pṛithivî-vijaya-janit-ôdaya-
vyâpta-nikhil-âvanitalâṁ kîrttim-itas=tridaśapati-

Kailâsa-Koṭṭa, mentioned by me above ; or, Koṭṭûr (from Koṭṭapura) being a very common Drâviḍian
name, may be looked for in any Koṭṭûr of note, in a mountainous part of Southern India, e.g.
possibly Koṭṭûr in the ' Coimbatore ' District, at the foot of one of the passes in the ' Anaimalai ' Hills,
(Indian Atlas, Sheet No. 61 or 62 ; Lat. 10° 32' N. ; Long. 77° 2' E.)
¹ In line 2 of the Udayagiri cave inscription of Chandragupta II. of the year 82, No. 3 below,
Plate iiB., this name occurs with the short vowel i in the fourth syllable.
² This visarga is imperfect, the engraver having omitted the upper half of it.
³ Mr. V. A. Smith (Jour. Beng. As. Soc. Vol. LIII. Part I. p. 119, and note) has suggested that
this name was not simply Gupta, as it is usually accepted, but Śrîgupta, which form he has used
throughout ; i. e. that, in this instance, śrî is an integral part of the name, not the honorific prefix.
His grounds for this opinion are (1) that the past participle gupta, ' protected,' can hardly stand alone
for a proper name, whereas Śrîgupta, ' protected by (the goddess) Śrî or Lakshmî,' would be a complete
name, giving a suitable meaning ; and (2) that the Chinese pilgrim I-tsing (in India from about A.D. 673
to 693) speaks of a king or Mahârâja called Śrîgupta, who preceded his time by about five hundred years
(Jour. R. As. Soc. N. S. Vol. XIII. p. 571 : Ind. Ant. Vol. X. p. 110), and who has been identified by
some with the founder of the Gupta family.—In addition to the instance quoted just above, Śrîgupta
occurs as the name of a persecutor of Buddha (Beal's Buddh. Rec. West. World, Vol. II.
p. 151 f.) as the name of a Jain saint (Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 252); and as the name of a mer-
chant (Nêpâl inscription, No. 13, line 12; id. Vol. IX. p. 176).—But, with regard to the present
passage, I have to point out (1) that, as it is now certain that the era used by the Early Guptas
commenced A.D. 319-20, the Mahârâja Śrîgupta, mentioned by I-tsing and referred by him to
about A.D 175, cannot be identified with the founder of the Early Gupta family, who lived in

(This page is blank and contains no inscription text or printed content.)

The provided image appears to be entirely blank/white with no visible text, inscriptions, or content to transcribe.

Please re-upload or check the image file.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; No. 1, PLATE I. 9
30 bhavana-gaman-âvâpta-lalita-sukha-vicharaṇâm-âchakshâṇa iva bhuvô bâhur-
ayam=uchchhritaḥ stambhaḥ [।*] yasya ¹ pradâna-bhujavikkrama-
praśama-śâstravâky-ôdayair-uparyupari-sañchay-ôchchhritam-anêka-mârggaṁ
yaśaḥ
31 punâti bhuvana-trayaṁ Paśupatêr-jjaṭ-ântar-guhâ-nirôdha-parimôksha-śîghram-iva
pâṇḍu Gâṅgaṁ p[ayaḥ] [॥] Êtach-cha kâvyam=êshâm-êva bhaṭṭâraka-
pâdânâṁ dâsasya samîpa-parisarppaṇ-ânugrah-ônmîlita-matêḥ
the fourth century A.D. (2) that, in the well-known name of the Buddhist saint Upagupta (e.g.
Buddh. Rec. West. World, Vol. I. p. 182; Vol. II. pp. 88, 93, 273), we have a precisely similar
instance of a past participle, meaning ‘hidden, concealed,’ standing by itself as a proper name; as
also, in its feminine form, Upaguptâ, in line 5 of the Asîrgaḍh seal of Śarvavarman, No. 47 below, Plate
xxxA. (3) that, when śrî is an integral part of any proper name of importance, it was customary to
emphasise it and prevent the possibility of doubt, by inserting the honorific prefix before it; thus,
mahâdêvyâṁ śrî-Śrîmatyâm=utpannaḥ, “begotten on the Mahâdêvî, the glorious Śrîmatî,” in line 2
of the Dêô-Baraṇârk inscription of Jîvitagupta II., No. 46 below, Plate xxixB.; śrî-Śrîpathâyâṁ
purî, “at the famous city of Śrîpathâ,” in verse in line 6 of the Byânâ inscription of Vikrama-
Saṁvat 1100 (Ind. Ant. Vol. XIV. p. 10); and śrî-Śrîpathâyâṁ, “at the famous Śrîpathâ,” in
prose in the Byânâ inscription of Vikrama-Saṁvat 1503 (id. Vol. XV. p. 239). The analogy would
require here the reading of mahârâja-śrî-Śrîgupta-prapautrasya; which, however, does not once
occur in the Early Gupta inscriptions. And (4) the word gupta does not appear at all in the name
of Ghaṭôtkacha in the next generation; it is only in the case of his son, Chandragupta I., and the suc-
cessors of the latter, that the word is of necessity only an integral part of a fuller name.—There is,
therefore, no objection, but on the contrary every reason, to read the present name as simply Gupta.—
The possibility remains, however, of its being an abbreviation of some fuller original name, other than
Śrîgupta. And on this point I will produce here a note with which Dr. Bühler has favoured me:—“I
“should say the name of the founder of the family was Gupta, not Śrîgupta in the sense of śriyâ guptaḥ
“(protected by the goddess Śrî). The name Rakshita occurs repeatedly among Brâhmaṇs and Buddhists;
“and means the same thing. The origin of such names as Datta, Gupta, Rakshita, &c.,” [the two first of
these are well-known surnames in Bengal in the present day] “must, I think, be sought for in the habit
“of the Hindus of shortening their names by giving only the first part or the second. The former prac-
“tice is alluded to by Kâtyâyana, in a Vârttika on Pâṇini, vii. 3, 45, where he teaches that, when the
“second part of a compound is left out, the a is to remain unchanged before the feminine termination
“â; thus, the feminine form of Dêvadattaka is Dêvadattikâ; but, if Dêvaka is substituted for
“Dêvadattaka, then the feminine is to be Dêvakâ, not Dêvikâ. The second shortening also is com-
“mon; thus, we have nâbhi for mṛiganâbhi, ‘musk;’ tâla for haritâla, a kind of tree; vâlî for
“khalêvâlî, ‘the post of a threshing-floor;’ and Bhâmâ for Satyabhâmâ, a proper name. From
“these facts it would seem that Datta, Gupta, &c., are abbreviations of longer names.”—The only
epigraphical instance that I can quote, of the omission of the first part of a proper name, is the use
of Śarman for Dhruvaśarman in line 11 of the Bilsaḍ inscription of Kumâragupta, No. 10 below, Plate
v. But instances of the omission of the second part of a name are common enough. Thus, we have
the use of Samudra on some of Samudragupta's gold coins, e.g. Jour. Beng. As. Soc. Vol. LIII. Part
I. Pl. ii. Nos. 3, 4, 5, and p. 173;—of Chandra and Kumâra, for Chandragupta II. and Kumâragupta,
in the same series;—of Vikrama and Mahêndra, for their full titles Vikramâditya and Mahêndrâ-
ditya, illustrated partly in the same series, and partly in Kumâragupta's silver coins (Ind. Ant. Vol.
XIV. p. 66);—of Śârdûla and Ananta, for Śârdûlavarman and Anantavarman, in the Barâbar and
Nâgârjunî Hill inscriptions, No. 48 below, Plate xxxB. ll. 1, 4, 5, and No 49, Plate xxxiA. ll. 1, 8;
—of Kâkustha and Mṛigêśa for Kakusthavarman and Mṛigêśavarman in one of the Halsî grants
(Ind. Ant. Vol. VI. p. 28, ll. 3, 4);—of Harsha, for Harshavardhana of Kanauj, e.g. in the Kauṭhêm
grant of Vikramâdtya V. (id. Vol. XVI. p. 22, l. 26);—of Vikrama, for the Western Châlukya king
Vikramâditya VI., e.g. in one of the Narêgal inscriptions (Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XI. p. 226,
l. 24);—and of Padma and Sûrya, for Padmapâla and Sûryapâla, in the Gwâlior inscription of
Mahîpâla (Ind. Ant. Vol. XV. p. 36 ff., ll. 1, 9, 22, 58.)
¹ This mark of punctuation is unnecessary.
C₂

10 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
32 Khâdyatapâkikasya mahâdaṇḍanâyaka-Dhruvabhûti-putrasya sândhivigrahika-
kumârâmâtya-ma[hâdaṇḍanâya]ka-Harishêṇasya sarvva-bhûta-hita-sukhây-
âstu । (॥)
33 Anushṭhitaṁ cha paramabhaṭṭâraka-pâd-ânudhyâtêna mahâdaṇḍanâyaka-
Tilabhaṭṭakêna । (॥)
TRANSLATION.
(Line 29.)—This lofty column (is) as it were an arm of the earth,¹ proclaim-
ing the fame,—which, having pervaded the entire surface of the earth with (its) develop-
ment that was caused by (his) conquest of the whole world, (has departed)
hence (and now) experiences the sweet happiness attained by (his) having gone to the
abode of (Indra) the lord of the gods,²—of the Mahârâjâdhirâja,³ the glorious⁴
¹ By taking an alternative meaning of uchchhhritaḥ, we might translate—"This column has been
erected, as if it were an arm of the earth," &c. But this would include the assumption that the column
had fallen, and was set up again in the time of Chandragupta II.; and in that case sthâpitaḥ would
have been a better word to use than uchchhhritaḥ, and the word would have stood better after, instead
of before, stambhaḥ. It seems best to adopt a translation that does not bind us to either view.—
Prinsep considered it to be proved that the column had fallen, and was set up again expressly to
display the present inscription. His grounds for this, opinion (Jour. Beng. As. Soc. Vol. VI. p. 967 f.)
are, that there are several names on it which he considered to be in characters of a type interme-
diate between those of the Aśôka and the Gupta inscriptions, and one of which, at least, it would have
been exceedingly inconvenient, if not impossible, to have cut while the column was erect. But
this particular name, with several of the others referred to by him, is in characters that are
certainly of considerably later date than the Gupta inscription ; and none of the names are in characters
that are any earlier than the inscription.
² i.e. on his death.—Compare the expression in line 23 f. of the Karda grant of Kakka III. of
Śaka-Saṁvat 894,—"and when (his) elder brother, the glorious Kṛishṇarâjadêva, had ascended to
the skies, as if from a desire to conquer the realm of Indra" (Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. pp. 265, 268) ; com-
pare also line 14, verse 30, of the Gwâlior inscription of Mahîpâla of Vikrama-Saṁvat 1150 (id.
Vol. XV. pp. 37, 43),—"Padmapâla, still a youth, through the adversity of fortune, obtained a seat
[on the lap] of Saṁkrandana (Indra)."
³ Mahârâjâdhirâja, lit. 'supreme king of Mahârâjas' (see page 15 below, note 4), is one of the
titles indicative of supreme paramount sovereignty, and is the only expression that properly and fully
answers to our idea of a 'king.' I use it and all other technical titles and terms, without translation,
because, if only for the sake of uniformity and convenience of comparison, it is much better to use
them in this way, than to attempt to render them into English by expressions which must always vary
according to the idiosyncracies of the translators, and which can never suffice to give exact and
complete equivalents for the original titles.—The present title, Mahârâjâdhirâja, in somewhat
later times, is almost always coupled with two others, Paramêśvara, 'supreme lord,' and Parama-
bhaṭṭâraka, 'most worshipful one;' e.g. in line 50 ff. of the Alînâ grant of Śîlâditya VII., No. 39
below, Plate xxv. And the connection of the three titles was so constant, that a Rîwâ grant
(unpublished) of Trailôkyamalla, dated Vikrama-Saṁvat 1297, considers it unnecessary to give all
three titles in full, and contents itself with describing him as paramabhaṭṭârak-êty-âdi-râjâvalî-tray-
ôpêta, "possessed of the three kingly titles (lit. succession) commencing with Paramabhaṭṭâraka."—
Other titles of paramount sovereignty, occurring in this series, are Râjâdhirâja and Chakravartin.
⁴ śrî, 'fortune, majesty, glory,' and śrîmat, 'possessed of fortune, majesty, glory,' are words
of constant occurrence as honorific prefixes to the names of persons, gods, places, &c. I render them
by 'glorious,' in the case of paramount sovereigns and their wives ; 'illustrious,' of feudatories and other
ordinary persons ; 'saintly,' of priests, teachers, &c.; 'holy,' of gods; and 'famous,' of towns, &c.—
The usual rule seems to have been, to use śrî before a consonant, and śrîmat before a vowel; thus
śrîmad-Indrabala-sûnôr . . . . . . śrî-Nannadêvasya tanaya-prâptaḥ . . . . . . śrî-Mahâśiva-Tîvararâjaḥ,
in the Râjim grant of the Râja Tîvaradêva, No. 81 below, Plate xlv. l. 16 ff. But instances of deviation
from this occur; thus, without saṁdhi or the euphonic joining of vowels, śrî-Âdityasênadêva, in the
Shâhpur image inscription, No. 43 below, Plate xxixA. l. 2 f., and śrî-Âdityasênadêvas and śrî-

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; No. 1, PLATE I. 11
Samudragupta,¹—
(L. 1.)—[Who] . . . . . by his own kinsmen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;—whose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;—
(L. 3.)—[Who] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
twanging (of the bow-string) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . burst open and
scattered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . dishevelled . . . . . . . . . . ;—
(L. 5.)—Whose happy mind was accustomed to associate with learned people;—
who was the supporter of the real truth of the scriptures; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . firmly fixed
. . . . . . . . ; —who, having overwhelmed, with the (force of the) commands of the col-
lective merits of (his) learned men, those things which obstruct the beauty of excellent
poetry, (still) enjoys, in the world of the wise, the sovereignty of the fame (produced) by
much poetry, . . . . . . and of clear meaning;—
(L. 7.)—Who, being looked at (with envy) by the faces, melancholy (through the
rejection of themselves), of others of equal birth, while the attendants of the court breathed
forth deep sighs (of happiness), was bidden by (his) father,—who, exclaiming “Verily
(he is) worthy,” embraced (him) with the hairs of (his) body standing erect (through plea-
sure) (and thus) indicati on (his) sentiments, and scanned (him) with an eye turning

Ijjâdêvyâm, in the Dêô-Baranark inscription of Jîvitagupta II., No. 46 below, Plate xxixB., lines 2 f.
and 5 f.; and, on the other hand, paramabhaṭṭâraka-mahârâjâdhirâja-paramêśvara-śrîmat-
Suvarṇavarshadêva-prithvîvallabha-śrîmad-Vallabhanarêndradêvaḥ, used in respect of the Râsh-
ṭrakûṭa king Gôvinda V in his Sânglî grant (Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 251, l. 39 f.); and numerous
other instances.—It has been suggested that only śrî, nct śrîmat, is used in the case of paramount
sovereigns. But this is not the case. In addition to the passage noted above in connection with
Gôvinda V., we have paramêśvara-śrîmad-Avantivarmand, in the Dêô-Baraṇârk inscription, l. 15;
śrîmad-Âdityavarma-prithvîvallabha-mahârâjâdhirâja-paramêśvaraḥ, applied to the Western
Chalukya king Âdityavarman in his Karṇûl grant (Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XVI. p. 234, l. 12 f.);
paramabhaṭṭâraka-mahârâjâdhirâja-paramêśvara-śrîmad-Dhârâvarshadêva, applied to the Râsh-
ṭrakûṭa king Dhruva, in the Waṇî grant of Gôvinda III. (Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 159, l. 33 f.);
śrîmad-Amôghavarsha-Nṛipatuṅga, used of king Amôghavarsha I. of the same dynasty, in his Śirûr
inscription (id. Vol. XII. p. 219, l. 16); śrîmad-Vikramâditya-śrîmat-Tribhuvanamalladêva, used of
the Western Châlukya king Vikramâditya V., in his Kauthêm grant (id. Vol. XVI. p. 24, l. 73); and
many other examples of the same usage.
¹ As regards the termination gupta, the Vishṇu-Purâṇa, Book iii. Chap. 10, verse 9, says—
“(The termination) śarman is prescribed for a Brâhmaṇ; varman belongs to a Kshatriya; (and) a
name characterised by gupta or dâsa is approved of in the case of (respectively) a Vaiśya and a Śûdra.”
The commentary in the Bombay edition gives, as examples, Sômaśarman, Indravarman, Chandragupta,
and Śivadâsa. (See also F. E. Hall’s edition of H. H. Wilson’s Translation, Vol. III. p. 99 f.) — So
also in the Mânavadharmaśâstra, ii. 31 (Burnell’s Translation, p. 20), a rule of the same tendency
is laid down, though without specifying any particular terminations.—On this authority, it has been
suggested that the Early Guptas were not of high rank, being at the best of the Vaiśya caste; and that
this is the reason why they felt such pride in their alliance with the Lichchhavis, as shewn by the
record of the name of Kumâradêvî and of her family on some of the gold coins of Chandragupta I.,
and by the epithet, “daughter’s son of Lichchhavi (or of a Lichchhavi king),” that is always applied
to Samudragupta in the genealogical passages.—No doubt some such rules as those prescribed by
the Vishṇu-Purâṇa and Mânavadharmaśâstra, were followed more or less in early times. But, as
instances of deviation from them, we have the name of the well-known astronomer Brahmagupta, who
it can hardly be doubted was a Brâhmaṇ; and Dâsavarman occurs, as the name of a Brâhmaṇ, in line
36 of the Nerûr grant of Vijayâditya, dated Śaka-Saṁvat 627 (Ind. Ant. Vol. IX. p. 131; Indian
Inscriptions, No. 20); and doubtless numerous similar instances might be found, if proper indexes
were available.
C 2.

14 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III
(L. 22.)—Whose imperious commands were fully gratified, by giving all (kinds of)
taxes and obeying (his) orders and coming to perform obeisance, by the frontier-
kings¹ of Samataṭa, Ḍavâka, Kâmarûpa, Nêpâla, Kartṛipura, and other (countries),
and by the Mâlavas, Ârjunâyanas, Yaudhêyas, Mâdrakas, Âbhîras, Prârjunas,
Sanakânîkas,² Kâkas, Kharaparikas, and other (tribes);—
(L. 23.)—Whose tranquil fame, pervading the whole world, was generated by
establishing (again) many royal families, fallen and deprived of sovereignty;—whose
binding together of the (whole) world, by means of the amplitude of the vigour of (his)
arm, was effected by the acts of respectful service, such as offering themselves as
sacrifices, bringing presents of maidens, (giving) Garuḍa-tokens,³ (surrendering) the
enjoyment of their own territories, soliciting (his) commands, &c., (rendered) by the
Daivaputras, Shâhis, Shâhânushâhis, Śakas, and Muruṇḍas, and by the people
of Siṁhala and all (other) dwellers in islands;—who had no antagonist (of equal power)
in the world;⁴—who, by the overflow of the multitude of (his) various virtues adorned
by a hundred good actions, rubbed out the fame of other kings with the soles of (his)
feet;—who, being incomprehensible, was the spirit that was the cause of the production
of good and the destruction of evil;—who, being full of compassion, had a tender heart
that could be won over simply by devotion and obeisance;—who was the giver of many
hundreds of thousands of cows;—
(L. 26.)—Whose mind busied itself with the support and the initiation, &c., of the
miserable, the poor, the helpless, and the afflicted;—who was the glorified personification
of kindness to mankind;—who was equal to (the gods) Dhanada and Varuṇa and Indra
and Antaka;⁵—whose officers were always employed in restoring the wealth of the
various kings who had been conquered by the strength of his arms;—
(L. 27.)—Who put to shame (Kaśyapa) the preceptor of (Indra) the lord of the
gods, and Tumburu and Nârada, and others, by (his) sharp and polished intellect and
¹ pratyanta-nṛipati.—This may denote either the kings within the frontiers of Samataṭa and the
following countries, i.e. the ‘neighbouring kings’ of those countries, or the kings or chieftains just
outside the frontiers of them. Upon the interpretation that is accepted, will depend the question
whether Samudragupta’s empire included those countries, or whether it only extended up to, and was
bounded by, their frontiers.
² See page 8 above, note 1.
³ garutmad-aṅka.—Whether the bird be Garuḍa or not, we have here, I consider, a distinct
allusion to the ‘bird-standard’ on some of the coins of Samudragupta and his successors; see, for
instance, the coins given by Mr. V. A. Smith in the Jour. Beng. As. Soc. Vol. LIII. Part I. Plate ii.
Nos. 3, 4, 5, 14, Plate iii. Nos. 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, Plate iv. Nos. 4, 5, 7; see also id. p. 131 f., and Ind.
Ant. Vol. XIV. pp. 93, 179. — garutmat is explained in dictionaries as meaning ‘a bird in general,’
as well as denoting ‘the bird Garuḍa.’ But its most usual and special signification is ‘Garuḍa;’ as,
for instance, in line 7 of the Râjim grant of the Râja Tîvaradêva, No. 81 below, Plate xlv.
⁴ Three of the habitual expressions of the Early Gupta records, applied always and only to
Samudragupta,—viz. the present one; "who was equal to (the gods) Dhanada and Varuṇa and Indra
and Antaka," which we have here in line 26; and "whose fame was tasted by the waters of the four
oceans," which occurs, for instance, in line 1 of the Bhitarî pillar inscription of Skandagupta, No. 13
below, Plate vii.,—are applied, curiously enough, to the Châlukya chieftain Vijayarâja of Gujarât, in
line 5 f. of his Kaira grant of the year 394 (Ind. Ant. Vol. VII. p. 248). The only difference is that,
in the second epithet, the reading there is sama-prabhâva, instead of simply sama.—Of the present
epithet, the latter part, apratiratha, was used on some of Samudragupta's coins; e.g. Jour. Beng.
As. Soc. Vol. LIII. Part I. Pl. ii. No. 6.
⁵ See the preceding note.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; No. 1. PLATE I. 15
choral skill and musical accomplishments;¹—who established (his) title of ‘king of
poets’ by various poetical compositions that were fit to be the means of subsistence of
learned people;²—whose many wonderful and noble deeds are worthy to be praised for a
very long time;—
(L. 28.)—Who was a mortal only in celebrating the rites of the observances of
mankind, (but was otherwise) a god, dwelling on the earth;—who was the son of the
son’s son³ of the Mahārāja,⁴ the illustrious Gupta;⁵—who was the son’s son of the
¹ Nārada is regarded as the inventor of the vīṇā or lute; and, with this reference to him and to
the musical accomplishments of Samudragupta, we have to compare the coins of the ‘lyrist type’ (see,
for instance, Jour. Beng. As. Soc. Vol. LIII. Part I. Pl. ii. Nos. 7, 8), which represent Samudragupta
playing the lute.
² Compare lines 6 and 16 of this inscription.—The title kavirāja, ‘king of poets,’ answering
somewhat to our ‘poet laureate,’ is still in use in Native States.
³ The English terms ‘grandson’ and ‘great-grandson’ are applicable to female as well as male
descent, and are therefore not suitable for use in translations from the Saṁskṛit. The Hindus were
almost always most careful about using properly discriminating terms, e.g. pautra for a grandson
through a son, and dauhitra for a grandson through a daughter; the status of the two lines of descent
differed even more than in European countries; and, in translating, it is necessary to preserve the
distinction accurately.—I will quote an instance in proof. In translating line 12 f. of No. 15 of his
Nêpâl inscriptions, Dr. Bhâgwanlal Indraji (Ind. Ant. Vol. IX. p. 181) spoke of “Vatsadêvî . . . .
“the daughter of illustrious Bhôgavarman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and the grand-daughter of great
“Âdityasêna, the illustrious lord of Magadha.” From this, Gen. Cunningham (Archæol. Surv.
Ind. Vol. XV. p. 163) naturally enough treated Bhôgavarman, who belonged really to the Maukhari
family, as a son, instead of a son-in-law, of Âdityasêna. This mistake could not have occurred, if
dauhitrī had been properly rendered by ‘daughter’s daughter,’ instead of vaguely ‘grand-daughter.’—
The words that are fairly translatable by ‘grandson’ and ‘great-grandson’ are naptri and
pranaptri. They both occur in the grants of the Mahārājas Hastin and Saṁkshôbha, Nos. 21 to 23
and 25 below; and naptri occurs in line 5 of the Bhumarā pillar inscription, No. 24 below, Pl. xvA.
But the use of them is rare.
⁴ Mahārāja, lit. ‘great king,’ appears to have been, in somewhat earlier times, one of the titles
of paramount sovereignty. Thus, it is used, by itself, by Kanishka, Huvishka, and Vâsudêva, who,
there is every reason to believe, were paramount sovereigns, in their inscriptions of the years 9, 39,
and 83 (Archæol. Surv. Ind. Vol. III. p. 31, Pl. xiii. No. 4; p. 32, Pl. xiv. No. 9; and p. 34, Pl. xv.
No. 16); and, in conjunction with the higher title of Rājātirāja, ‘superior king of kings,’ by the same
three kings in their inscriptions of the years 11, 47, and 87 (Ind. Ant. Vol. X. p. 326; Archæol.
Surv. Ind. Vol. III. p. 33, Pl. xiv. No. 12, and p. 35, Pl. xv. No. 18). So also, in conjunction some-
times with the same word and sometimes with Râjarâja, ‘king of kings,’ the two together represent-
ing the Greek basileus basileon, it was used, in Prâkṛit, on the bilingual coins of earlier date; e.g.
in conjunction with Rājātirāja, on the coins of Hemokadphises (Gardner and Poole’s Catalogue of
Coins of the Greek and Scythic Kings of Bactria and India, p. 124 ff.), and, in conjunction with
Rājarāja, on the coins of Azes (id. p. 73 ff.) And, before then, it was used by itself, to represent the
Greek basileus, at a time when apparently the fuller title of basileus basileon had not been introduced;
e.g. on the coins of Hermaeus (id. p. 62 ff.)—But, in the Early Gupta and subsequent periods,
Mahārāja was habitually used simply as a technical official title, indicative no doubt of considerable
rank and power, but applied only to feudatories, not to paramount sovereigns.—From the way in
which the two titles are applied uniformly to Samudrasêna and his ancestors in the Nirmand grant,
No. 80 below, Plate xliv., the title Mahāsāmanta, lit. ‘great chief of a district,’ appears to have been
exactly co-ordinate with that of Mahārāja.—A third title, Mahāsēnāpati, lit. ‘great lord of the army,’
seems to have denoted equal rank with these two; since it is coupled with Mahārāja in the frag-
mentary Bijayagadh inscription of the Yaudhêyas, No. 58 below, Plate xxxviB., and also in the Walā
clay seal of Pushyêṇa (Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 274 f.)—And three other offices, viz. those of
Mahāpratīhāra, Mahādaṇḍanāyaka, and Mahākārtākṛitika, would seem to have been sometimes held
by Mahārājas and Mahāsāmantas; since we find all five titles applied to Dhruvasêna I. of Valabhî.
in line 13 f. of the Walā grant of Gupta-Saṁvat 216 (Ind. Ant. Vol. IV. p. 105).
⁵ As regards this name, see page 8 above, note 3.

16 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III.
Mahârâja, the illustrious Ghaṭôtkacha;—who was the son of the Mahârâjâdhirâja,
the glorious Chandragupta (I.), (and) the daughter's son of Lichchhavi,¹ begotten
on the Mahâdêvî² Kumâradêvî;—
(L. 30.)—(And) whose fame,—ever heaped up higher and higher by the development
of (his) liberality and prowess of arm and composure and (study of) the precepts of the
scriptures,—travelling by many paths, purifies the three worlds, as if it were the pale
yellow water of (the river) Gaṅgâ, flowing quickly on being liberated from confinement in
the thickets of the matted hair of (the god) Paśupati.³
(L. 31.)—And this poetical composition,—(the work) of the Khâdyaṭapâkika,⁴ the
son of the Mahâdaṇḍanâyaka⁵ Dhruvabhûti, the Sâṁdhivigrahika⁶ and Kumârâmâtya,⁷
the Mahâdaṇḍanâyaka Harishêṇa, who is the slave of these same feet of the
¹ Or "of a Lichchhavi (king)."—The present is the more usual form of the name. But the
variant Lichchbivi, with the vowel i instead of a in the second syllable, occurs in line 3 of the
Bhitarî pillar inscription of Skandagupta, No. 13 below, Plate vii.; in line 5 of the spurious
Gayâ grant of Samudragupta, No. 60 below, Plate xxxvii.; and in the Mânavadharmaśâstra, x. 22
(Burnell's Translation, p. 308), where a Lichchbivi, with others, is defined as the offspring of a
degraded member of the Kshatriya caste.
² Mahâdêvî, lit. 'great goddess,' appears to have been always a technical title of the wives of
paramount sovereigns; though, in somewhat later times than that of the present inscription, it was
also sometimes applied to the wives of Mahârâjas, e.g. throughout the Kârîtalâl grant of Jayanâtha,
No. 26 below, Plate xvi.—As applied to the wives of paramount sovereigns, we have it again in the
present volume, in conjunction with Paramabhaṭṭârikâ and Râjñî, in the Mandâr Hill inscriptions of
Âdityasêna, Nos. 44 and 45 below, and throughout the Dêô-Baraṇârk inscription of Jîvitagupta II.,
No. 46 below, Plate xxixB. In other series it occurs, for instance, as part of the name of Lôkamahâdêvî,
the queen-consort of the Western Chalukya king Vikramâditya II., in some of his Paṭṭadakal inscrip-
tions (Ind. Ant. Vol. X. p. 164 ff.); and as the title of Gâmuṇḍabbe, the wife of the Râshṭrakûṭa king
Gôvinda III., in line 5 of the grant of Śaka-Saṁvat 726 (id. Vol. XI. p. 127).
³ When, under the circumstances referred to in the note on line 3 f. of the Mandasôr inscription
of Yaśôdharman and Vishṇuvardhana, No. 35 below, Plate xxii., the river Ganges was about to descend
from heaven to earth,—in order to break the force of its fall, the god Śiva (Paśupati) received it in the
matted hair coiled above his forehead and projecting like a horn; and its waters wandered there for a
thousand years, before they eventually reached the earth.
⁴ It is doubtful whether this is a tribal or family name, or an official title. The etymology of it is
not apparent.
⁵ Mahâdaṇḍanâyaka, lit. 'great leader of the forces,' is a technical military title.—The officer
who held this rank was the superior of the Daṇḍanâyakas, or 'leaders of the forces.' This latter title
occurs, for instance (together with that of Piriyadaṇḍanâyaka, which is the Old-Kanarese trans-
lation of the Sanskrit Mahâdaṇḍanâyaka), in line 17 ff. of the Baḷagâmve inscription of Saṅkamadêva
(Ind. Ant. Vol. V. p. 46.)—We constantly meet with Daṇḍanâtha, Daṇḍâdhinâtha, Daṇḍâdhipa,
Daṇḍâdhipati, Daṇḍêśa, and Daṇḍêśvara, as synonyms of Daṇḍanâyaka.—Prinsep translated
Mahâdaṇḍanâyaka in the present inscription by 'administrator of punishments (magistrate)' and
'criminal magistrate;' and this rendering has sometimes been adopted by other translators. As daṇḍa
means 'fine' and 'rod (of chastisement),' as well as 'army, forces,' the titles in which it occurs are
capable of being explained as either judicial or military. But, that they are employed in the inscrip-
tions as military titles, is shewn (1) by the way in which the words Chamûnâtha, Chamûpa, Chamûpati,
&c., in which chamû means only 'army,' are occasionally used as synonyms for Daṇḍanâyaka, &c.,
e.g. in line 33 ff. of the Kargudari inscription of Vikramâditya VI. and Tailapa II. (Ind. Ant.
Vol. X. p. 252), where the Daṇḍâdhinâtha and Daṇḍâdhipa Îśvarayya is also called Chamûpa; and
(2) by the definition of the Daṇḍanâyaka Kâvaṇayya as samasto-sên-âgrêsara, or 'leader of the whole
army,' in line 19 of the Baḷagâṁve inscription referred to above.
⁶ Sâṁdhivigrahika, lit. 'an officer for peace and war,' is a technical official or military title.
Other synonymous titles were Saṁdhivigrahâdhikṛita (e.g. Ind. Ant. Vol. VII. p. 70, line 17 f.);
Saṁdhivigrahâdhikaranâdhikrita (e.g. id. Vol. IV. p. 175, line 18); and Saṁdhivigrahin (e.g. id.
Vol. VIII. p. 20, where it is coupled with Mahâpradhâna and Daṇḍanâyaka).—The next grade above
this was that of the Mahâsâṁdhivigrahika, whose title occurs, for instance, in line 29 f. of the Khôh
grant of the Mahârâja Hastin of the year 163, No. 22 below, Plate xiii.
⁷ Kumârâmâtya, lit. 'counsellor of the prince,' is another technical official title.—The next
grade above it was that of the Mahâkumârâmâtya, who is mentioned, for instance, in line 33 of the
Bhâgalpur grant of Nârâyaṇapâla (Ind. Ant. Vol. XV. p. 306.)

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; No. 1, PLATE I. 17
Bhaṭṭâraka,¹ (and) whose mind is expanded by the favour of constantly walking about
in (his) presence,—let it be for the welfare and happiness of all existing beings!
(L. 33.)—And the accomplishment of the matter has been effected by the
Mahâdaṇḍanâyaka Tilabhaṭṭaka, who meditates on the feet² of the Parama-
bhaṭṭâraka.³
¹ It is somewhat doubtful whether this title here denotes Samudragupta, or his successor; but
on the whole, êshâm, 'these,' being used, not têshâm, 'those,' the passage seems to have a strictly
present sense, and to refer to Chandragupta II.; contrast tasya, 'of him, of that one,' which is used
to denote Samudragupta in line 17 above, but which I have had, for convenience, to render in the
translation by the relative pronoun.—Bhaṭṭâraka, lit. 'one who is entitled to reverence or homage,'
is another technical kingly title. In somewhat later times, it seems to have belonged properly
to feudatory Mahârâjas; thus, it is coupled with the name of the Mahârâja Śivadêva I. in
two of the Nêpâl inscriptions (Ind. Ant. Vol. IX. p. 168, No. 5, line 2, and Vol. XIV. p. 98,
line 2), and with the name of the Mahârâja Dhruvadêva in the same series (id. Vol. IX. p. 173.
No. 10, line 4, where the syllables mahâ, at the end of the line, are omitted in the published text).
So, also, we find the feminine form, Bhaṭṭârikâ, used as the termination of the names of wives of
Mahârâjas; e.g. in line 3 ff. of the Asîrgaḍh seal of Śarvavarman, No. 47 below, Plate xxxA., and in
line 4 of the Nirmand grant of the Mahârâja and Mahâsâmanta Samudrasêna, No. 80 below, Plate
xliv.—As applied to paramount sovereigns, the fuller and more usual title is Paramabhaṭṭâraka, as
in line 33 of this inscription (see also page 10 above, note 3). But other instances occur in
which the shorter title is used; e.g. in line 6 of No. 9 of the Nêpâl inscriptions (Ind. Ant. Vol. IX.
p. 172), Aṁśuvarman has the titles of Bhaṭṭâraka and Mahârâjâdhirâja; in line 17 ff. of the
Wokkalêri grant of Kîrttivarman II. (id. Vol. VIII. p. 26 f.), the Western Chalukya kings
Vikramâditya I. and his successors, down to Kîrttivarman II., all have the titles of Mahârâjâdhirâja,
Paramêśvara, and Bhaṭṭâraka. And we have the same title in Old-Kanarese inscriptions, in the ab-
breviated, or perhaps original, forms of Bhaṭâra and Bhaṭṭâra; e.g. in line 2 f. of the Mahâkûṭa
inscription of the Western Chalukya king Vijayâditya (id. Vol. X. p. 103), in which he has the titles
of Mahârâjâdhirâja, Paramêśvara, and Bhaṭâra; and in line 2 of the Paṭṭadakal inscription of the
Râshṭrakûṭa king Dhruva (id. Vol. XI. p. 124), in which he has the titles of Mahârâjâdhirâja,
Paramêśvara, and Bhaṭṭâra.—In the sense of 'reverend,' bhaṭṭâraka was also a priestly title; e.g. it
is applied to the Jain priest Kumudachandra, in line 2 of the Nêsargi inscription (id. Vol. X. p. 189,
note 16).—And, in the sense of 'worthy of worship; sacred,' it was also applied to gods; e.g. to
Paśupati (Śiva), in line 1 of No. 6 of the Nêpâl inscriptions (id. Vol. IX. p. 169); to the Sun, in line 15
of the Khôh grant of the Mahârâja Śarvanâtha, No. 28 below, Plate xviii.; and to Varuṇavâsin (the
Sun), in line 13 of the Dêô-Baraṇârk inscription of Jîvitagupta II., No. 46 below, Plate xxixB.
² pâd-ânudhyâta.—This is a customary technical term, used of the relations between a para-
mount sovereign and his feudatory chieftains, officials, &c.; e.g. in the Udayagiri cave inscription
No. 3 below, Plate iiB., the Mahârâja, who makes the gift, is described as meditating on the feet of
Chandragupta II.—It is also applied to the relations between parents and their children; e.g. in line
18 of the Râjîm grant, No. 81 below, Plate xlv., the Râja Tîvaradêva is described as meditating on
the feet of his mother and father. It is also used in connection with kingly successions, whether the
natural relationship is that of fathers and sons, or of elder and younger brothers; e.g. throughout the
Kârîtalât grant of the Mahârâja Jayanâtha, No. 26 below, Plate xvi.; and in lines 0 and 8 of the grant
of the Mahârâja Vinâyakapâla (Ind. Ant. Vol. XV. pp. 140, 141), who is described as meditating on
the feet of his father, Mahêndrapâla, and of his elder brother, Bhôja II. And it is also used in respect
of the worship of gods; e.g. in line 3 of the grant of the Eastern Chalukya king Amma II. (Ind. Ant.
Vol. XIII. p. 249), the Chalukyas are described as meditating on the feet of the god Svâmi-Mahâ-
sêna.—In one solitary instance, line 33 f. of the Khârêpâṭaṇ grant of Śaka-Saṁvat 930 (Jour. Bo.
Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. I. p. 218), anudhyâta occurs without pâda preceding it, and the Śilâhâra chieftain
Raṭṭarâja is described as śrî-Satyâśrayadêv-ânudhyâta, "meditating on the glorious (king) Satyâśraya."
But the omission of pâda here is probably due only to carelessness on the part of the drafter of the
record.
³ i.e. Chandragupta II.—Paramabhaṭṭâraka, lit. 'one who is supremely entitled to reverence
or homage,' is one of the technical titles indicative of supreme sovereignty (see page 10 above, note 3).—
I have found one instance in which it is also used as a priestly title, in line 43 of an inscription of
Śaka-Saṁvat 1172 at Mamdâpur in the Belgaum District (Indian Inscriptions, No. 1), where it is
applied to a Śaiva priest named Vimalaśiva or Vimalaśambhu.—The feminine form, Parama-
bhaṭṭârikâ, was one of the titles of the wives of paramount sovereigns; e.g. in the Mandâr Hill
inscriptions of Âdityasêna, Nos. 44 and 45 below.
D.

18 CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM INDICARUM, VOL. III
No. 2; PLATE IIA.
ERAN STONE INSCRIPTION OF SAMUDRAGUPTA.
THIS inscription, which has not been previously edited, was discovered in 1874-75 or
1876-77 by General Alexander Cunningham, R.E., C.S.I., C.I.E., then Director-General of
the Archæological Survey of India, and was first brought to notice by him in 1880, in the
Reports of the Archæological Survey of India, Vol. X. p. 89.
Êraṇ,¹ the ancient Airikiṇa,² is a village on the left bank of the Bînâ, eleven miles
to the west by north from Khurâî,³ the chief town of the Khurâî Tahsîl or Sub-Division of
the Sâgar⁴ District in the Central Provinces. The inscription is on a red-sandstone squared
block, that was found a short distance to the west of the well-known ruined temple of the
Boar,⁵ at which there is the inscription of Tôramâṇa, No. 36 below. The original stone is
now in the Imperial Museum at Calcutta.
The writing, which covers the entire front of the stone, about 9½″ broad by 3′ 1″
high, is in a state of fairly good preservation ; but it does not give a very clear lithograph,
in consequence of the whole surface of the stone being full of holes more or less large.
It is only a fragment ; six entire lines, as shewn by the numbering of the verses, have
been broken away and lost at the top of the stone, and an indefinite number at the bottom;
and also an entire pâda of each successive verse, has been broken away and lost
at the commencement of lines 25 ff. In addition to this, from one to three letters have
been destroyed at the commencement of each extant line, as far as line 24, by whetting
tools on the edge of the stone. As far as line 24, each line contains one pâda of a verse;
but the following lines contained originally two pâdas each ; this shews that the inscrip-
tion was of an irregular shape, with probably some sculptures on the proper right side of
the stone above the first halves of lines 24 ff.—The average size of the letters is about ½″.
As is indicated especially by the form of m, the characters belong to the southern class of
alphabets ; and I should be inclined to name them a variety, with southern characteristics,
of the Central India alphabet of the period. The particular type used in this inscription
is further represented in the present volume by the Udayagiri cave inscription of Chandra-
gupta II. of the year 82, No. 3 below, Plate iiB.; the Âraṅg plates of Mahâ-Jayarâja, No.
¹ The 'Airan, Ehrin, Eran, and Erun,' of maps, &c. Indian Atlas, Sheet No. 52. Lat. 24° 5′ N.;
Long. 78° 15′ E.—The name is now written and pronounced both Eraṇ and Êraṇ ; but, as is shewn
by the ancient name, Airikiṇa, the first form, with the lingual ṇ, is the correct one.—The name is not
unique; for the maps shew another 'Eran' seven miles almost due west of Bhêlsâ, and another
thirteen miles to the north-east of Bhêlsâ.
² So far as the passage in line 25 of the present inscription goes, we might take this name as
either Airikiṇa or Êrikiṇa, in consequence of the euphonic absorption of the final a of vishaya. But
the real form of the name is shewn by line 7 of the Boar inscription of Tôramâṇa, No. 36 below,
Plate xxiiiA., where we have vishayê=sminn=Airikiṇê, without any saṁdhi or joining of vowels.—
The autonomous copper coins of the Aśôka period, found at Êraṇ, give us an earlier Pâli or
Prâkṛit form of the name, which is either Erakaña or Erakaṇa ; but the last syllable is not very dis-
tinct in the specimens available for examination (Archæol. Surv. Ind. Vol. XIV. p. 149, and Plate
xxxi. Nos. 17 and 18.)
³ The 'Khorye, Khurai, Korai, Kurai, and Kurâi,' of maps, &c.
⁴ The 'Ságar and Saugor' of maps, &c.
⁵ Archæol. Surv. Ind. Vol. X. Plates xxvA. and xxviA.

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS; No. 2, PLATE II A. 19
40, Plate xxvi.; the Râypur plates of Mahâ-Sudêvarâja, No 41, Plate xxvii.; the Vâkâṭaka
inscriptions, Nos. 53 to 56, Plates xxxiii. xxxiv. and xxxv.; and the Râjim plates of Tîvara
dêva, No. 81, Plate xlv. The chief characteristic of it is the peculiar 'box-headed' tops
of the letters, formed by sinking four short strokes in the shape of a square and leaving a
block of stone or copper in the centre of them. We have a variation of this characteris-
tic, represented in this volume by the Majhgawâṁ plates of the Mahârâja Hastin of the
year 191, No. 23, Plate xiv., in which the tops of the letters, instead of being 'box-headed'
or square, are 'nail-headed' or triangular, with the apex of the triangle downwards.¹ And
the present inscription contains a mixture of both types; the 'nail-headed' tops can be seen
in, for instance, prithu-râghav-âdyâḥ, line 8, and samudraguptaḥ, line 10; and the 'box-
headed' tops in, for instance, bahu-putra-pautra, line 19, and samara-karmma parâkkram-
êddhaṁ, line 21. Owing to the nature of the substance worked on, in the case of inscrip-
tions on stone, except those on a large scale, these centre blocks would obviously be very
liable to injury; in the actual process of engraving, as well as from the wear and tear of
time. The result is that, though these two characteristics of this alphabet are usually
very well preserved and are very recognisable in the copper-plates, in the stone
inscriptions they are preserved, so as to be clearly recognised in this series of Plates, only
in the large-scale Nachnê-kî-talâî inscriptions of the Mahârâja Prithivishêṇa, Nos. 53
and 54, Plate xxxiiiA. and B. In the present inscription I cannot find a single instance
in which there is enough left of the triangular or the square centres of the tops of the
letters, to shew distinctly in the lithograph. It is, in fact, quite possible that, in inscrip-
tions of this scale on stone, the engraver was not very particular about leaving the centre-
blocks at all; an indifference about this is certainly observable even in the Chammak
plates of the Mahârâja Pravarasêna II., No. 55, Plate xxxiv., through nearly the whole
of which the tops of the letters were scooped out hollow, without any centre-blocks at all.
The characters include, in the numbering of the verses, forms of the numerical symbols
for 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.—The language is Saṅskṛit; and the inscription is in verse through-
out.—In respect of orthography, the only points that call for notice are (1) the use of
the guttural nasal, instead of the anusvâra, before h, in paribriṅhaṇa, line 26; and (2)
the doubling of k and dh, in conjunction with a following r, in vikkrama, line 1, and
parâkkrama, lines 17 and 21; and in ddhrutam, line 12.
The inscription is one of the Early Gupta king Samudragupta, whose name
is recorded in line 10. From the occurrence of the word babhûva in line 9, the first part
of the inscription probably mentioned some of his ancestors. But, that the inscription did
not extend to the time of any of his successors, is shewn by the fact that none of their
names can be fitted into any of the places where letters are illegible in lines 11 to 24;
consequently, the prowess, &c., described in these lines are those of Samudragupta; and
this description is immediately followed by the mention of the erection, at the city of
Airikiṇa, i.e. Êraṇ, of something or other of which the stone was either a portion or the
separate record. The lacunæ here leave us without any clue as to what was erected, and
in connection with what form of religion. But, judging from its shape and appearance,
¹ Mr. C. Bendall has obtained two specimens of triangular-headed characters, one of them in
Nêpâl, in which, differing from the present forms, the apex of the triangle is placed uppermost; see
his Journey in Nêpâl, p. 54 f. He appears to have named them 'point-headed' or 'arrow-headed'
characters.—Quite recently, Mr. J. Robinson, C.E., of Gayâ, has sent me, for examination, another
very interesting specimen of a variety of the same characters in an inscription on the bottom plate
of a brass image of Buddha.
D 2.