187 
1862.] Remarks on the alove by E. C, Bay ley, Esq. 
three* letters, viz., the 11th of the first line and the ninth and tenth 
of the second line, appears to me open to any doubt. I would also 
add that as I read the original sealing wax impressions, the 12th let¬ 
ter of the first line has the vowel mark of “ e” which the plate as 
published does not give. 
Of the three doubtful letters Babu Rajendra Lai would wish to 
read the first as “jna.” There is here even not only no authority for 
this reading, but a direct authority against it; “jna” occurs, as Rajen- 
dra Lai himself has pointed out, on the biliteral coins of Kanunda in 
a form which by no possibility can have been corrupted or converted 
into that here used. I am free to admit that there is no distinct 
example, so far as I am aware, of the character here employed, else¬ 
where—but it is in itself nothing more than a couple of “v” s placed 
the one above the other—the compound of two “ v” s is not an un¬ 
common one, and though probably such compound letters were not 
known to the earlier Pali, there is, I think, some ground for believing 
that they were gradually introduced into it. The compound of “ s,’* 
“ t” and “r,” of “t” and “r,” of “s” and “p,” of “j” and “n” have 
been fully recognized and established by bi-literal inscriptions. There 
is, therefore, no antecedent improbability against the reception of the 
compound, and I believe that most of the characters in those inscrip¬ 
tions which are yet undetermined, are probably also compound. 
The second doubtful letter, the twelfth of the second line, I agree 
with Rajendra Lai in rendering as “lu” or better perhaps “lo,” but 
the shape of the vowel mark makes the reading a little uncertain. 
The 13th letter is too in all probability a vowel, but I think rather 
“ 6,” or perhaps “ u,” than “i,” as was rendered in the note above. 
I may also point out that the 14th letter may possibly be either 
an “ r” or a “ t j” it certainly is not a “ v” as rendered by Rajendra 
Lai, and all the other letters in the reading by which I differ from 
him may be seen at once by the parallel transliterations given below. 
Babu Rajendra Lai’s 
“ Sirie bhagava bodhavo prajna” 
“ Ratiyamatuf hasisapita hasasilu” 
“ iva sasi atiyoha viharati.” 
* Since writing the above I have had an opportunity of examining the ori¬ 
ginal gold leaf : the ninth letter may possibly be read as “ye.” 
f The plate given omits the vowel mark which is that of the vowel “e.” 
