Epigraphia Zeylanica: Being Lithic and Other Inscriptions of Ceylon

been [duly] identified, restored to the respective owners, and have [the thieves] hanged '.

[Lines 14-18] If [offenders] are not detected, the inhabitants of the dasa-gam shall find them and have them punished within forty-five days. Should they not find them, then the dașa-gam shall be made to pay [a fine of] 125 kalandas [weight] of gold to the State 3.

[Lines 18-20] If [the case] be an aggravated assault and not murder, [a fine of] 50 kalandas [weight] of gold shall be exacted as [penalty for] damage to life. Should this not be feasible, ge-dad shall be exacted. If [however, the assailants] are not detected, the dasa-gam shall be made to pay [a fine of] 50 kalandas [weight] of gold to the State.

[Lines 21-25.] From those who went out to do menial work, a fine of 50 kalandas [weight] of gold shall be exacted. Should this not be feasible, ge-dad shall be levied. Should there be no gc-dad, they shall be punished by having their hands cut off. Holders of villages and of pamaņu lands' shall divide among themselves in accordance with former usage the proceeds of (the....) fines and the minor (?) fines.

[Lines 25-30] Those who have slaughtered buffaloes, oxen, and goats shall be punished with death. Should [the cattle] be stolen but not slaughtered, after due determination [thereof], each [offender] shall be branded under the armpit.

1 Elvanu. This word is used in the sense of 'suspending' both in the modern language and in an ancient Sinhalese tract called Sikhakaraņi (above, p. 99, note 5). The context, too, seems to support the above rendering, for it provides punishment in the case of theft, just as in that of murder. But I have not yet come across 'hanging' mentioned as a form of capital punishment in Sinhalese literature. Besides, if death penalty was meant, we should expect the phrase marā patvanu ko! repeated. It is true that in the Dēśavalamii, ‘hanging' is referred to as one of the forms of death punishment, but this Tamil work is a compilation of the eighteenth century founded on the laws and customs prevailing in Jaffna during the Dutch period. Regarding the restoration of stolen goods, see Manu, viii. 40; l'işņu, iii. 66.

Compare in this connexion the statutes of William the Conqueror (Stubbs's Charters, pp. 83–85). Radolat, lit. 'to the royal family.' Cf. the forms raj-kol and rad-kol, above, pp. 47. 54 note 1, 55 note 2, 161 note 5, 189 note y.

♦ Div-milä, lit. 'life-price.' It is not clear from the context whether this is a bot or a rule. Cf. Taswell-Langmead's English Constitutional History, p. 32, Manu, viii. 287, and Visu, v. 60-75. Cf. also the old Indian term raira in Macdonell and Keith, Vedic Index, ii. 331. 332.

' Probably a fine imposed on each household. Skt. grha-danda. See above, pp. 54 note 3, 103 note 12.

Gam-laddan, lit. 'recipients of villages.' Same as P. gama-bhojaka (above, p. 206, note 7, and below, p. 259). Compare in this connexion the official title bhogika so often occurring in Indian inscriptions. Bhōgika may also mean 'a village proprietor.' See Ep. Ind. v. p. 39.

Pamanu-laddan. Cf. pamaņu-laduvan, käbäli-laduvan, and pamaņu-gam, above, p. 117.

If [the nature of the offence]1 be not determined, [the culprits] shall be beaten. The buffaloes, oxen, and goats which are brought from outside for sale, shall only be bought after due identification of them and on security being given.

[Lines 31-36] Those who have effaced brand-marks shall be made to stand on red-hot iron sandals. The inhabitants of these dasa-gam shall observe without transgression the privileges they enjoy on [occasions of] rejoicing and mourning that occur in their respective families. If there be a villager who has come from (outside?) the limits prescribed for these dasa-gam, [he] shall be [duly] identified, and after taking security, shall be allowed to remain [in the dasa-gam].

[Lines 36-41] If there be one who has entered [these villages] after having committed an improper act, though security is taken, the inhabitants of the village in which the party at first resided, shall be permitted to impose [punishment on him].

Should the inhabitants of these dasa-gam villages have transgressed any of the rules stated [above], the Royal Officials who go annually [on circuit] to administer justice [in the country] shall .

[Lines 41-45] Goļuggamu Ra(k)sā (im) Ku(ḍā)-senu, Meykāppar Kuburgamu Lok(o)hi, and Kätiri Agbohi, as well as Kuṇḍasalā Ara(yan): all these lords who sit in the Royal Council, and who have come [together] in accordance with the mandate delivered [by the King in Council] have promulgated these regulations.

That is to say, whether the crime is one of cattle-slaughtering or of cattle-lifting.

? Probably the brand-marks on cattle.

If the reading 'palandna' is adopted, the translation would run 'privileges in respect of dress

on occasions of rejoicing and mourning.'

• The text here not being clear, I cannot be quite certain of my interpretation.

• Illanna! (line 40), modern Sinh. ' to claim or demand.' The full expression should be raț illannaţ. Compare the two decrees dede havurudden gos raj-kol-sam-daruvan rat illa pas mahā sāvaddä-varaj illat-mut sesu varad no illanu isă...... raț paṭavannat giya raj-kol-sam-daruvan gat dandä gingiriyak äta sam-daruvan daṇḍa-nayakayan hindä vicara-ko! häriyä jutuvak harnā isā in the slab-inscription of Kassapa V (lines 19-20, and 22-24, above, p. 47). Rat illannat and rat paṭavannat are both technical official terms. The first seems to signify the administration of justice in the country, the second the imposing of punishment. See above, p. 53, note 13, and p. 54, note 1. In the Dampiyāaṭuvā-gäṭapada (p. 92) iliyannem is given as the translation of P. anvēsam, the present participle of anvēsati (Skt. anu+ √is), seek, search, or investigate.' Possibly this has the same etymology as our word illanavā, as it certainly has the same meaning in all the tenth and eleventh century inscriptions known to us.

" I am unable to make out this word owing to the indistinctness of some of the letters. "Lit. 'these regulations were made by the lords.'

No. 22. JĒTAVANĀRĀMA INSCRIPTION OF MALU-TISA

(circa 229-247 A.D.)

HIS inscription was discovered by the Archaeological Commissioner of Ceylon (Mr. H. C. P. Bell) in 1910. It consists of 16 lines, covering an area of 6 ft. 10 in. by 4 ft. 8 in. of the top side of a slab now forming one of the flag-stones of the pavement at the south altar of the so-called Jētavanārāma Dāgaba.

The letters are boldly engraved and are quite clear, with the exception of those at places where the stone is worn or damaged. Their size varies from 11 to 22 in. each, and they belong to the Southern Brāhmī alphabet of the latter part of the second or the first half of the third century A. D. Their type, however, indicates a certain 'archaic' or retrograde tendency. The elongated vertical strokes, as a rule curved at the end, of a, ka, ra, and la, which are some of the characteristic features of the Southern Brahmi alphabet of this period both here and in India, are entirely wanting. In other respects the letters have undergone normal development, as will be seen on a comparison of the accompanying facsimile (Plate 30) with those of the earlier inscriptions at Perumaiyankuļam, Pālu-Mäkiccäva, and Maha-Ratmale (above, Plates 13 and 27). Attention should be drawn to the svastika in lines 9, 12, and 14. It is used here perhaps to serve both as an auspicious symbol and as a mark of punctuation.

The language is ancient Sinhalese, which in style and phraseology resembles so much the Prakrit dialects employed in the earliest inscriptions of India.

The orthography seems to be faultless with the exception of gari in line 10, which is obviously a clerical error for giri, as given in line 13. The grammar too is regular. We see the nominative singular in -7, the genitive in -ha, the locative in -hi, the dative in -haṭaya, and the gerund in - and -ya, e. g. kotu, kadaya, and karavaya. We find also the crude form of the noun used for the nominative, as is sometimes the case in Prakrit. All these have already been noticed and in part explained elsewhere in the present volume '.

Regarding the etymology and the meaning of uncommon words and phrases in the text, the reader is referred to the remarks which immediately follow the translation.

The inscription is one of king Maļu-Tisa, son of king Naka. His identity

See the Index for references.

with Kaniṭṭha-Tissa (circa 229–247 A.D.), son of Mahallaka-Någa, was first established by Dr. Müller1. It records that at Utara-maha-ceta, he effected repairs, built four gateways and a 'sitting-hall' (asana-hala), and granted the income derived from certain tanks and 'anicuts' for the maintenance of the monks of the Abhayagiri-vihāra and for expenses connected with the repairs of its buildings, the Great Refection,' and the supply of oil and offerings. The Utara-maha-ceta may be identified with the Abhayuttara-mahā-cētiya of the Abhayagiri-vihāra, mentioned both in the Mahavamsa and in the two foregoing inscriptions of Mahinda IV from the same locality as the present one. In lines 5, 12, and 15 we are told that Malu-Tisa caused the construction of four ayikas ('gateways'?) to this Maha-cetiya, the Gamiņi-Tisa tank, and a 'sitting-hall.' The Mahavamsa3, however, ascribes the erection of adimukhas ('arches'?) at the four gates of the same cetiya, the formation of the GāmaņiTissa tank, and the building of the Mahā-āsana hall in the capital to king Gajabāhu, who reigned some thirty years before Malu-Tisa.

Finally, seeing that the present slab and the two foregoing ones of Mahinda IV as well as the slab-inscription of Kassapa V (above, No. 4) exclusively deal with the Abhayagiri Monastery, we would naturally expect to find them set up in the vicinity, if not within the precincts of the monastery in question. But they were discovered within the area of the so-called Jētavaṇārāma. Hence arises the question whether the stones were in their original position when they were found, or they have been brought to Jētavanārāma in later times from the Abhayagiri. If the former be the case, doubts may be entertained as to the correctness of the accepted identification of the Jētavanārāma ruins, especially as this monastery was only built in the reign of Mahāsēna, some eighty-four years after king Malu-Tisa. It may, in view of these facts, be possible that these ruins belong to another monastery attached to the Abhayagiri fraternity, if they are not of the Abhayagiri-vihāra itself.

See above, p. 216.

3 Ch. xxxv. 119-122.

As to the places mentioned in the record, Upala-ketaka (Skt. Utpalakṣētraka) may have been a tract of field in Upala-vibajaka or -bijaka referred to in the inscriptions of Palu-Makiccäva and Tammännä-kanda 3. I take 1 A. I. C., p. 29. • It is unfortunate that the letters immediately preceding the word asana-hala are so indistinct in the inscription; else they would probably help us to determine whether the building in question was a temple dedicated to the yakkha named Mahēja (Mv. T. xvii. 30), or Mahejjä (Professor Geiger's edition), that is to say, whether it was called Mahējāsanasālā, as the Burmese recension of the Mahāvaṁsa gives, or was simply an āsana-sālā of the congregation of monks, as the Sinhalese recension seems to indicate. See above, p. 210.

VOL. I.

Majata-gamaṇa as a proper name with kiriye, loc. of kiriya (P. karīsa) added to it. In the Habarana record1 Dr. Müller reads mujita gamana keriyahi, which he translates 'on account of the inundated villages,' deriving mujita from the p.p.p. of majj and keriya from P. kariya. The Kubigamika-vavi may have been a tank in Kibi-gama mentioned in line 8 of the Vevälkäțiya inscription. The district Vihira-bijaka, where the tank Visala-gamika-vavi (line 11) was, may be identical with the one named in the Maha-Ratmale and the Galkovila inscriptions 3, and in My. xvii. 59.

The following edition of the record is based on two ink-estampages and two eye-copies supplied by the Archaeological Commissioner of Ceylon.

SWS.

1 [සිධ - නක මහරජහ පුත ම]ළු (ති) සමහරජි උතර මහ චෙතහි