DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.2371#0089
HATHI GTTMPHA. 67
these predecessors of the Mauryan dynasty. It may, however, be
that he was only contemporary with the Nandas and with the first
Mauryan kings. At the same time all the historical allusions which
this inscription contains seems to show that he must have lived
before the time when Asoka carved his edicts at Dauli.
The Hathi Gumpha inscription represents the king as oscillating
between the Brahmanical and the Buddhist forms of faith, and
though he finally settled down to the latter belief, the whole tenor
of the narrative is such, that we are led to believe that the
Brahmanical was the prevalent faith of the country, and that he was,
if not the first, at least one of the earliest converts to Buddhism.
This could hardly have been the case had Asoka's inscriptions at
Dauli—almost in sight of this cave—been in existence when it was
engraved, and he could hardly have failed to allude to so powerful
an emperor, had he ruled in Orissa before his time. Altogether, it
seems from the contents of the inscription so much more probable
that Aira should have ruled before the rise of the great Maurya
dynasty, than after their establishment, that I feel very little hesita-
tion in coming to the conclusion that 300 B.C., or thereabouts, is
the most probable date for this inscription.1
In so far as the history of cave architecture is concerned the
determination of the age of this inscription is only a political
question, not affecting the real facts of the case. As it is avowedly
the earliest thing here, if its date is 200 B.C., all the caves that show
marks of the chisel are more modern, and must be crowded into
the period between that date, and the epoch at which it can be
ascertained that the most modern were excavated. If, on the other
hand, its date is about 300 B.C., it allows time for our placing the
oldest and simplest caves as contemporary with those just described
in Behar, and allows ample time for the gradual development of the
style in a manner more in conformity with our experience of cave
architecture in the west of India.
1 It seems that the vowel marks in the word which Prinsep read as " Suke " in the
first line are so indistinct, that it is more probable the word ought to he read Saka;
and if this is so it may lead to an interesting national indication. I submitted the
passage to Professor Eggling, of Edinburgh, and in reply he informs me that tne
passage may very well be read " By him who is possessed of the attributes of the
famous Saka (race)." If this is so, he may have been either one of those Yavanas
who came from the north-west, or at least a descendant of some of those con-
querors.
E 2
these predecessors of the Mauryan dynasty. It may, however, be
that he was only contemporary with the Nandas and with the first
Mauryan kings. At the same time all the historical allusions which
this inscription contains seems to show that he must have lived
before the time when Asoka carved his edicts at Dauli.
The Hathi Gumpha inscription represents the king as oscillating
between the Brahmanical and the Buddhist forms of faith, and
though he finally settled down to the latter belief, the whole tenor
of the narrative is such, that we are led to believe that the
Brahmanical was the prevalent faith of the country, and that he was,
if not the first, at least one of the earliest converts to Buddhism.
This could hardly have been the case had Asoka's inscriptions at
Dauli—almost in sight of this cave—been in existence when it was
engraved, and he could hardly have failed to allude to so powerful
an emperor, had he ruled in Orissa before his time. Altogether, it
seems from the contents of the inscription so much more probable
that Aira should have ruled before the rise of the great Maurya
dynasty, than after their establishment, that I feel very little hesita-
tion in coming to the conclusion that 300 B.C., or thereabouts, is
the most probable date for this inscription.1
In so far as the history of cave architecture is concerned the
determination of the age of this inscription is only a political
question, not affecting the real facts of the case. As it is avowedly
the earliest thing here, if its date is 200 B.C., all the caves that show
marks of the chisel are more modern, and must be crowded into
the period between that date, and the epoch at which it can be
ascertained that the most modern were excavated. If, on the other
hand, its date is about 300 B.C., it allows time for our placing the
oldest and simplest caves as contemporary with those just described
in Behar, and allows ample time for the gradual development of the
style in a manner more in conformity with our experience of cave
architecture in the west of India.
1 It seems that the vowel marks in the word which Prinsep read as " Suke " in the
first line are so indistinct, that it is more probable the word ought to he read Saka;
and if this is so it may lead to an interesting national indication. I submitted the
passage to Professor Eggling, of Edinburgh, and in reply he informs me that tne
passage may very well be read " By him who is possessed of the attributes of the
famous Saka (race)." If this is so, he may have been either one of those Yavanas
who came from the north-west, or at least a descendant of some of those con-
querors.
E 2