1044 Note on Col. Sykes' Inscriptions \pEt. 



also occur in some of the present examples : and particularly in fig. 1 

 of the accompanying plate, wherein Colonel SYKBshappily confirms the 

 correction I ventured to introduce into the Rev. Dr. Stevknson's 

 copy of the same line (see page 468 of the present volume). Strange to 

 say there are many other discrepancies of equal magnitude in the two 

 copies of this simple document : Col. Sykes* line reading : 



Saharavisabhoti putasa (a) gimitaukasa sihathabho ddnanti 

 The change from pihathato ddra to sihathabho ddnam, immediately 

 opens our eyes to the subject of the record, sihathabho (or sihathambhaj 

 being the regular Pali orthography of f^f^ i^m : Sinha stambhas, the 

 lion pillar; and Col. Sykes informs us that the inscription is engraven 

 " on the obelisk or pillar in front of the Kdrli cave." The obvious 

 translation then is, 



" This lion pillar is the gift of Agimitra Ukas the son of Saha Ravisa- 

 bhoti." 



In fig. 2 a perfect inscription from the doorway of the Sainhadri caves 

 north of Jooneer fJuniraJ, we may remark the commencement of a de- 

 parture from the original form in some of the letters used : thus the 

 t or ^ is changed to f^ , a common form also in the Girnar inscrip- 

 tions, and evidently the link between the original form and the J> of 

 the Mahamalaipura inscriptions, and of the various southern alphabets : 

 it may be also seen in inscription 3 of the present plate. This letter 

 would be taken for an n by readers on our side of India ; and this is 

 perhaps one of the best possible proofs of the authenticity of the pri- 

 mitive form, whence by distinct ramifications in opposite sides of the 

 peninsula the same derivative has come to denote quite a different ori- 

 ginal! The n, of our Samudra Gupta and more modern alphabets is 

 derived from _]_ ; this when written, required the pen to be carried below 

 forming a loop thus J_ ; which was gradually carried downward in ^ 

 and o\ , and ended in the modern «?r. But I must not attempt on this 

 occasion to analyze individual letters, or I shall be carried away into 

 an endless digression. Correcting the second anomalous letter conjec- 

 turally, the Hue will run thus : — 



Dhammika seniya sata gabham udhi cha daya dhamam. 

 which corresponds precisely with the Sanskrit : 



^Tf^ktiffa ^rTJli? v^^ <^T3&. 



" The hundred caves and the tank of Dha'rmika SilnI — his act of piety, and 

 compassion." 



I must be allowed to remark en passant that the letter n has here 

 changed its form to ~J^, which appears to be the original form of the 



