Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T12:40:04.776Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Remarks on Dr. Vogel's Note

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

J. F. Fleet
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Miscellaneous Communications
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , October 1910 , pp. 1315 - 1317
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1910

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Page 1315 note 1 There was a doubt regarding the vowel of the second syllable.

Page 1315 note 2 In addition to Dr. Vogel's remarks, I have before me an inkimpression of the record, which he kindly sent, made (I think) by Pandit Radha Krishna.

Page 1315 note 3 With the Kārttikādi expired year, the details, falling in the hot season, place the record in b.c. 33.

Page 1316 note 1 Luders, , List of Brāhmī Inscriptions, Ep. Ind., vol. 10, appendix, No. 51Google Scholar.

Page 1316 note 2 For rājya-saṃ, = rājya-saṃvatsarē. I follow Professor Luders in reading sam, on the assumption that he has an impression or estampage which shows it: but the published lithograph gives sa; and an omission of the anusvāra would be quite natural.

Page 1316 note 3 Gupta Inscriptions, p. 43, line 6.

Page 1316 note 4 Lüders, List of Brāhmī Inscriptions, No. 22.