^{page 575 note 1} The fact that the covers of two of the vessels were lying apart from the vessels themselves is probably due to earthquakes. Two earthquakes have been noticed at Gorakhpur within the last four years. (V. A. S.)

^{page 576 note 1} Archaeol. Survey of India, New Imp. Series, vol. xv.

^{page 577 note 1} For the transliteration and translation see J.R.A.S., 1898, p. 388, and the following Note.

^{page 577 note 2} In my opinion this structure was an open platform, not the site of any building. Small votive stūpas of brick may have stood on it. (V. A. S.)

^{page 577 note 3} This building was evidently a monastery. (V. A. S.)

^{page 578 note 1} The occurrence of these arch bricks is of special interest. (V. A. S.)

^{page 578 note 2} Mr. Peppé's tracing of the map of the surrounding country has not heen reproduced. (V. A. S.)

^{y 3} It is to be hoped that Mr. Peppé will be good enough to continue his explorations. Other inscribed vases will probably be found in the numerous stūpas in the neighbourhood. (V. A. S.)

^{page 578 note 4} These little pieces of concrete are the only indications of the use of lime in the building. (V. A. S.)

^{page 579 note 1} [These were unfortunately so injured in the post that they cannot be reproduced. But Mrs. Peppé's full-size drawing of the objects in the four vases has escaped destruction and is reproduced as a plate. The other plate reproduces the photograph of the inscribed vase (Figures 4 and 5). Above it is given a photograph (Figures 1, 2, and 3) of the very similar inscribed vase from Sonārī now in the British Museum. This was discussed in Cunningham's, “Bhilsa Topes,” p. 317.—Rh. D.]Google Scholar

^{page 580 note 1} Niglīva and Kapilavastu are really close together, and only 31 miles from Uskā Station. The distances as stated by Dr. Führer in his reports are erroneous.

^{page 580 note 2} Both of these Aśoka inscriptions have been recently edited by DrBühler, in “Epigraphia Indica,” vol. v, p. 1Google Scholar.

^{page 582 note 1} Rea, “South Indian Buddhist Antiquities,” being vol. xv of Archaeological Survey of India Reports, n.s., pp. 2, 3, 7, and 8.

^{page 582 note 2} Cunningham, , “Reports,” v, 75Google Scholar.

^{page 583 note 1} Rea, op. cit., p. 9, pl. ii.

^{page 583 note 2} Rea, op. cit., p. 33.

^{page 584 note 1} Ghaṇṭaśālā is 13 miles west of Masulipatam. (Rea, op. cit., p. 3.)

^{page 585 note 1} Rea, op. cit., p. 20. Guḍivāḍa is twenty miles north-west of Masulipatam.

^{page 585 note 2} Rea, op. cit., p. 12.

^{page 586 note 1} [Mr. Peppé's pencil rubbing reads quite clearly sabhatiṇilamaṃ—where the ti may be a slip of the pencil for gi, but the ṇi is doubtless right.—Rh. D.]

^{page 586 note 2} [The rubbing has clearly suputa- not saputra-dalanaṃ.The letters on the photograph are quite clear. Unfortunately, as it gives only the first half of the inscription, these two words do not appear in it. A large photograph of the whole inscription on the Peppé vase, to be taken if necessary on two or three plates, is greatly to be desired.—Rh. D.]

^{page 587 note 1} Or “of the renowned Sakya brethren,” that is, as I understand, the brethren of Budha bhagavata. This suggestion is due to Dr. Hoey, and seems sound. The reading Sakiyanaṁ was first published by Dr. Hoey in the Pioneer. [V. A. S.]

^{page 588 note 1} [The words are as follows (Sutta, Mahā-parinibbāna in J.R.A S. 1876, p. 260)Google Scholar:—

Kapilavatthavā pi Sakyā Kapilavatthusmiṃ Bhagavato sarīrānaṃ thūpañ ca, mahañ ca akamsu.

In my English translation (“Buddhist Suttas,” S.B.E., vol. xi, p. 134) this clause has been, by inadvertence, omitted.

In Pāli the inscription would run —

Idam* sarīra-nidhūnuṃ* Buddhassa bhagavato Sākiyānaṃ Sukitti-bhātikānam* sabhoginīnaṃ* saputtadārānaṃ.

So that among these few words there are no less than four that show a slight difference in dialect between Pāli and the language of the inscription, even allowing, as is undoubtedly the case, that the omission of long vowels and doubled consonants is purely a matter of orthography; and further, the phrase sarīra-mdhānaṃ seems awkward in Pāli prose in the sense intended, since sarīra in the singular means not ‘relics’ but ‘body,’ but the corresponding compound sarīra-thupa occurs in the sense of ‘stūpa over relics’ in the last sentence of the Sutta above quoted.

It is misleading to render bhagavato by ‘divine.’ The word means merely ‘august, auspicious, felix.’

An alternative rendering of the inscription would be: This shrine for relves of the Buddha, the August One, is that of the Sākyas, the brethren of the Distinguished One, in association with their sisters, and with their children and their wires.—Rh. D.]