No CrossRef data available.
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.
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
This is the title of an article which I have just submitted for publication in the Epigraphia Indica. As the controversy about the various problems connected with the Kushana period of the Indian History has been carried on chiefly in the pages of this Journal, I venture to present a brief note on the new details furnished by the three inscriptions concerned. All the three records were discovered by Rai Bahadur Pandit Radha Krishna, Honorary Curator of the Museum of Archæology at Mathurā (vulgo Muttra). Inscriptions Nos. 1 and 2 were brought to light in the year 1918–19 and 1920–1 respectively, and have been briefly noticed in the Annual Report of the Archæological Survey of India, Northern Circle, Hindu and Buddhist Monuments for those years. The contents of the third inscription were summarized by Dr. Vogel in the Annual Report of the Director-General of Archæology in India, part ii, for 1911–12, p. 125. In this note I propose to publish a complete transliteration of the existing portion of the record and to draw attention to one or two points which escaped Dr. Vogel's notice.
page 401 note 1 This site is well known from the statues of Kāniṣka, Vima Takshama, etc., which have been unearthed in it.
page 402 note 1 Annual Report of the Director-General of Archæology in India, pt. ii, for 1911–12, p. 125.
page 402 note 2 Cf. for instance, a similar gerundial form gṛihya, occurring in verse 20 of Bhāsa's Dūtaghaṭotkacha (Trivandrum Sanskrit Series, No. xxii), p. 59.
page 403 note 1 Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society for March, 1919, pp. 98–9.
page 404 note 1 The latest certain date for Vāsiṣka is the year 29 and the earliest date for Huviṣka the year 33. The interval between these years is reduced to two years if Dr. Vogel's reading of the date in the one-line inscription on the fragmentary pedestal, No. A. 71, in the Mathurā Museum is really the year 31.
page 404 note 2 Such being the case, all of the eight nameless inscriptions beginning with No. 24 of Saṁvat 15 and ending with No. 31 of the year 22 in Dr. Lüders List of Brahmi Inscriptions must have been recorded in the reign of Kāniṣka.
page 405 note 1 Indian Antiquary, vol. xxxvii, p. 59.Google Scholar
page 405 note 2 Oxford History of India, 1919, pp. 130–1.
page 405 note 3 Annual Progress Report of the Superintendent, Hindu and Buddhist Monuments, Northern Circle, for the year 1916–17, p. 8.