^{page 369 note 1} See farther on in this number of the Journal.

^{page 369 note 2} At any rate, as we have this alphabet in inscriptions and on coins.

^{page 370 note 1} See the Annual Progress Report of the Superintendent, Hindu and Buddhist Monuments, Northern Circle, for the year ending 31 March, 1912, p. 2, para. 5.

^{page 370 note 2} The vowel is somewhat blurred, owing to damage to the stone: but it is distinctly recognizable as the short one.

^{page 371 note 1} The marks above the ṇa are only due to damage to the stone; compare similar marks in other places in this record.

^{page 373 note 1} For the general bearing of this expression compare Aṁgiya-kula-radhana, “an increaser of the Aṁgiya family,” in the Nānā Ghāṭ inscription, ASWI, vol. 5, p. 60Google Scholar, line 3. I am indebted to Dr. Barnett for reminding me of this.

^{page 373 note 2} The turn to the left is there spoken of as a “hook”: but it does not amount to that, being not in any way curved or bent upwards. The mark which Senart, M. (loc. cit., pp. 10–11)Google Scholar dismissed, along with some more or less similar marks attending other letters, as being either a carelessness of the engraver or an accidental mark on the stone, is not this turn to the left, but is the less well defined wedge-shaped mark, point downwards, which runs on in continuation of the vertical stem from the point where the turn to the left begins. Professor Lüders, also, attached no value to this mark. It is due, in my opinion, to the surface of the stone splintering and flaking off before the push of the engraving tool. There are marks of the same class, coming down from the line above, over the sha: and there is something of the same kind on the left of the u of the gu.

^{page 374 note 1} See also the u of gushanṇasa in the Panjtār inscription: the earlier figuring, reproduced in the accompanying plate, shows the loop not made completely: the later figuring shows a complete loop, and is perhaps more correct in this detail; but either form is admissible.

^{page 375 note 1} This arrangement, B, which seems to have become the prevailing one with the Later Kushāns, is in fact very rare among the earlier coins. There, in addition to B, 1, I find it only on (1) gold coins of Kanishka, in Gardner, plate 26, figs. 16, 17, 18; but the last of these probably belongs to the later series: also Cunningham, plate 16, fig. 8 (his fig. 13 = Gardner, fig. 16): (2) copper coins of Huvishka, in Gardner, plate 29, figs. 2, 4, and Cunningham, plate 19, figs. E, F: (3) coins bearing the name of Vāsudēva; gold, in Cunningham, plate 24, figs. C, D, and 12 (legends very corrupt, and probably Later Kushān); copper, ibid., fig. 10.

^{page 376 note 1} This has been figured in preference to Gardner's plate 27, fig. 7, because there is a doubt as to the genuineness of the latter coin.

^{page 376 note 2} In the right field there is the Brāhmī syllable pa; and for this and other reasons the coin is assigned to one of the Later Kushāns, the first successors of the Kanishka—Vāsudēva group: see Cunningham, in Num. Chron., 3rd series, vol. 13 (1893), pp. 115, 119Google Scholar; the coin is figured again there in plate 8, fig. 1. I am indebted to Mr. Allan for drawing my attention to this disposal of the coin.

^{page 377 note 1} But it is said thab every rule has its exceptions: and the remark applies here in a few cases. See, for instance, two gold coins of Vāsudēva: Cunningham, plate 24, figs. A and D. Here we have the usual standing king, with splayed feet and altar. The arrangement of the legend is that of class A above. Shaonano begins down on the left, beside the altar. The n of Koshano stands on the right, beside the king's left foot: but there was no room there for the final o; and it was inserted on the left, below the altar, beside the right foot.

See also two other gold coins of the same king: Gardner, plate 29, fig. 9; Cunningham, plate 24, fig. 3. The arrangement of the legend is the same. Here, again, the final o is on the left, below the altar, beside the king's right foot. The letters oshan are missing.

See also another gold coin of the same king: Cunningham, plate 24, fig. 4. The arrangement of the legend is again the same. The king's name is presented as Bazoa, with the mistake of a for d, and with omission of ēo. The final o of Koshano stands below the space between the king's feet.

Even in these instances, however, it is clear that the legend begins with shaonano shao.

^{page 377 note 2} One case is the coin of Huvishka figured farther on, C, 2: here something which projects from the top of the king's head-gear lies between shao and Ooēshko. The other is the coin of Vāsudēva mentioned last in the preceding note: here, again, there is a separation between shao and the proper name, due to the king's diadem.

^{page 378 note 1} This last word was overlooked by Gardner in this case: but Cunningham recognized it; and it is unmistakable. The bottom and part of the body of the sh, with part of the a, can be seen clearly below the two hind feet of the elephant. The final o perhaps fell outside the coin, along with the top parts of those two letters and of some others on both sides, or perhaps was inserted in miniature close behind the right hind foot.

^{page 379 note 1} It seems to be admitted that this is a moot-point.

^{page 379 note 2} JA, 1896, ii, p. 457: and see Ind. Ant., 1903, p. 385.Google Scholar

^{page 379 note 3} Ind. Ant., 1903, p. 356Google Scholar, verse 49.

^{page 380 note 1} JA, 1896, ii, p. 457, note: and see Ind. Ant., 1903, p. 386.Google Scholar

^{page 380 note 2} Ind. Ant., 1903, p. 348.Google Scholar

^{page 380 note 3} In ordinary use, as another term for the sacred darbha-grass; and as a proper name, in the case of a son of Rāma, and in various other instances.

^{page 381 note 1} See the passage quoted on p. 80 above.

^{page 381 note 2} Ind. Ant., 1903, p. 349.Google Scholar