286 Inscription from Kesariah. [Mat, 



VII. — Note on an Inscription found near the Kesariah Mound, in Tirhiit. 

 By J. B. Elliott, Esq. (PL XVII. fig. 6.J 



[In a note to the Editor.] 



Having seen mention of the Kesariah Mound made in the last No. 

 of your Journal, I beg to enclose the impression of an inscription cut 

 below the figures of the Avatars, sculptured on a black stone, which I 

 obtained at Kesariah several years ago from a fakir. The figures being 

 small and rudely sculptured, it is not worth while making a copy of 

 them ; but as the inscription could not be made out by the Pandit of 

 the Chaprah Committee, it may be worth deciphering. I visited and 

 made some notes on the subject of the pillars, and other antiquities in 

 Champaran, which I may, perhaps, hereafter communicate. 



Note. — This fragment, which is Brahmanical, not Buddhist, is in an 

 ancient form of Devanagari, differing little from that noticed on the 

 Bakra image of Mr. Stephenson. It breaks off abruptly with an 

 initial i : — for it is only to hirttir iha that any meaning can be traced : 

 while the diphthong ai or e is plain over the last letter, which I con. 

 elude to be an h. The reading in modern Devanagari will be as 

 follows: I have added a literal Latin version. 



Perpetuus B. Candradattus Su'ryadatti " Sukti"-(recitandi)-proprio-tem- 

 pore-(sc.)-Solis-die-natus. Gloria hie s 



The interpretation of which in English will be : — 

 " The ever-living Chandradatta was born on the Sunday appro- 

 priated to the reading of the Siikta by his father Su'ryadatta. Glory 



here " (The Sukta is the most sacred hymn of the Rig Veda, 



closing its 3rd Ashtaka or Ogdoad — and has for one of its verses 

 the celebrated Gayatri.) 



W. H. M. 



[Note. — I take this opportunity of pointing out, in reference to my observation 

 on the Bakra image inscription, (page 131,) that I had overlooked a plate in 

 Franklin's Palibothra, of a Buddhist image, with an inscription, to which Lieut. 

 Cunningham has since drawn my attention. On turning to it, I perceive, that 

 the two lines separately given are, though miserably perverted by the copyist, 

 precisely the same as the ye dharmmd hetun, &c. of Sarnath. The three lines 

 on the pedestal, though stated in the text to be different, would appear to be the 

 same also ; at least the two first words, ye dharmmd, are distinct. — J, P.] 





