Eran Stone Inscription of Samudragupta

Author of digital edition: Dániel Balogh (daba).

Contributor: Dániel Balogh (daba).

Language: Sanskrit (san) [Southern Brāhmī (other) (brāhmī_southern_other)].

Repository: Siddham (siddham).

Identifier: DHARMA_INSSiddham00002.

File path: XML-Provisional/DHARMA_INSSiddham00002.xml.

Version: 2026-07-17 15:30 (3e68bda), last modified 2026-07-17 15:30 (3e68bda).

Edition

⟨1⟩ […]
⟨2⟩ […]
⟨3⟩ […]
⟨4⟩ […]
⟨5⟩ [––⏑–⏑⏑⏑–⏑⏑–⏑–⏓]
⟨6⟩ [––⏑–⏑⏑⏑–⏑⏑–⏑–⏓]
⟨7⟩ [––⏑–⏑⏑⏑–⏑] suvarṇṇa-dāne
⟨8⟩ [––] ritā nr̥patayaḥ pr̥thu-rāghavādyāḥ 2
⟨9⟩ [––] babhūva dhanadāntaka-tuṣṭi-kopa-tulyaḥ
⟨10⟩ [⏑–⏑] ma-nayena samudraguptaḥ
⟨11⟩ [––] pya pārtthiva-gaṇas sakalaḥ pr̥thivyāM
⟨12⟩ [––] (sva)-rājya-vibhava-(ddh)rutam āsthito bhūt 3
⟨13⟩ [––] (va bha)kti-naya-vikkrama-toṣitena
⟨14⟩ [–] rāja-śabda-vibhavair abhiṣecanādyaiḥ
⟨15⟩ [––] nitāḥ parama-tuṣti-puraskr̥tena
⟨16⟩ [––⏑] vo nr̥patir aprativāryya-vīryyaḥ 4
⟨17⟩ [––] sya pauruṣa-parākkrama-datta-śulkā
⟨18⟩ [––] śva-ratna-dhana-dhānya-samr̥ddhi-yuktā
⟨19⟩ [––] ṅgr̥heṣu muditā bahu-putra-pautra-
⟨20⟩ -[sa]ṅkrāmiṇī kulavadhū¿ḥ? vratinī niviṣṭā 5
⟨21⟩ [yasyo?]rjjitaṁ samara-karmma parākrameddhaṁ
⟨22⟩ [––] yaśaḥ suvipulam paribambhramīti
⟨23⟩ [––] ṇi yasya ripavaś ca raṇorjjitāni
⟨24⟩ [sva]pnāntareṣv api vicintya paritrasanti 6
⟨25⟩ [––⏑–⏑⏑⏑–⏑⏑–⏑–⏓] [–] (pta)ḥ sva-bhoga-nagarairikiṇa-pradeśe
⟨26⟩ [––⏑–⏑⏑⏑–⏑⏑–⏑–⏓] [saṁ](sth)āpitas sva-yaśasaḥ paribr̥¿ṅ?hanārttham 7
⟨27⟩ [––⏑–⏑⏑⏑–⏑⏑–⏑–⏓] [––⏑] vo nr̥patir āha yadā [⏑–⏓]
⟨27⟩ [––⏑–⏑⏑⏑–⏑⏑–⏑–⏓] [––⏑–⏑⏑⏑–⏑⏑–⏑–⏓] […]

Display Options Word Wrap Line Numbers Comments Processing Instructions

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<?xml-model href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/erc-dharma/project-documentation/master/schema/latest/DHARMA_Schema.rng" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"?>

<?xml-model href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/erc-dharma/project-documentation/master/schema/latest/DHARMA_SQF.sch" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron"?>

<?xml-model href="https://epidoc.stoa.org/schema/latest/tei-epidoc.rng" schematypens="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"?>

<?xml-model href="https://epidoc.stoa.org/schema/latest/tei-epidoc.rng" schematypens="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron"?>

<title>Eran Stone Inscription of Samudragupta</title>

<resp key="contributor">Original EpiDoc Encoding for Siddham</resp>

<forename>Dániel</forename>

<surname>Balogh</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt>

<resp key="contributor">Conversion of encoding for DHARMA</resp>

<forename>Dániel</forename>

<surname>Balogh</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt>

<resp key="creator">intellectual authorship of edition</resp>

<forename>Dániel</forename>

<surname>Balogh</surname>

</persName>

</respStmt>

</titleStmt>

<authority><ref target="https://dharmalekha.info">DHARMA</ref></authority>

<pubPlace>Berlin</pubPlace>

<idno type="filename">DHARMA_INSSiddham00002.xml</idno>

<!--

If this file is moved into a named DHARMA corpus, retain the Siddham identifier as <altIdentifier>

-->

</publicationStmt>

<repository>DHARMAbase</repository>

<idno/>

</msIdentifier>

</msContents>

<p/>

</handDesc>

</physDesc>

</msDesc>

</sourceDesc>

</fileDesc>

<p>Encoded in TEI/EpiDoc according to the <ref target="https://hal.science/halshs-02888186">DHARMA Encoding Guide for Documentary Editions, version 2</ref></p>

</encodingDesc>

<change who="part:daba" when="2023-05-15" status="draft">Additional global changes for compatibility with DHARMA</change>

<change who="part:axja" when="2021-07-06" status="draft">Updating toward the encoding template v03</change>

<change who="part:daba" when="2020-08-04" status="draft">Initial import: harmonising file structure with DHARMA inscription template v02. Text and comments as inherited from the Siddham archive of January 2019, unless otherwise indicated (by a name and date in the comment). Comments are offered "as is" and do not represent a thoroughly considered or researched opinion.</change>

</revisionDesc>

</teiHeader>

<body>

<lg n="1" met="vasantatilakā"><certainty match="../@met" locus="value"/><!--

The beginning of the text is entirely broken away. The inscription has exactly 1 pāda per line (up to line 24, except ls 9-10 where 9 contains the first 2 syllables of the next pāda), and the verses are numbered, so there should be 6 lost lines before the first partially preserved line. But it may be better to number just the extant lines; there may have been some prose before the first stanza.

-->

</lg>

<l n="c"><lb n="7"/><seg met="++-+---+-"><gap reason="lost" quantity="9" unit="character"/></seg> suvarṇṇa-dāne</l>

<l n="d"><lb n="8"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> ritā nr̥patayaḥ pr̥thu-rāghavādyāḥ <num value="2">2</num><!--

Bhandarkar reconstructs the beginning as saṁvāritā. Agrawal_1986:10-11 suggests vismāritā. Agrawal_1986:15 also mentions that saṁvāritā is Sircar's reconstruction, while Sadhu Ram had suggested nyakkāritā. Agrawala considers the former irrelevant and the latter too blunt. I tend to agree.

--></l>

</lg>

<l n="a" enjamb="yes"><lb n="9"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> babhūva dhanadāntaka-tuṣṭi-kopa<!--

Bhandarkar reconstructs the beginning as rājā.

--><!--

Fleet:_1888:19 observes that the perfect tense probably indicates that one or more of SG's ancestors were described here; he also notes that the names of none of his successors can be fitted into the lacunae in l11-24, so the inscription is of SG's time. Agrawal_1986_10-12 argues that the inscription is posthumous, since babhūva must clearly go with SG and successors may well have been mentioned in verses completely lost after the end of the extant portion. While this is possible, I donn't think a successor's inscription would have dwelt so long on SG, and I don't believe the perfect must necessarily imply, especially in metrical verse, a distant past.

--></l>

<l n="b">-tulyaḥ<lb n="10"/><seg met="-+-"><gap reason="lost" quantity="3" unit="character"/></seg> ma-nayena samudraguptaḥ<!--

Bhandarkar reconstructs sad-āgama at the beginning of line 10; Sircar offers parākrama, while Agrawala suggests sa vikkrama.

--></l>

<l n="c"><lb n="11"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> pya pārtthiva-gaṇas sakalaḥ pr̥thivyāM<!--

Sircar reconstructs the first 3 syllables as yaṁ prāpya, Bhandarkar as ājñāpya

--></l>

<l n="d"><lb n="12"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> <unclear>sva</unclear>-rājya-vibhava-<unclear>ddh</unclear>rutam āsthito bhūt <num value="3">3</num><!--

Sircar reconstructs the first 3 syllables as paryasta, Bhandarkar as yena sva-

--></l>

</lg>

<l n="a"><lb n="13"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> <unclear>va bha</unclear>kti-naya-vikkrama-toṣitena<!--

Sircar reconstructs the first 3 syllables as tātena, Bhandarkar as pitraiva

--></l>

<l n="b"><lb n="14"/><seg met="+"><gap reason="lost" quantity="1" unit="character"/></seg> rāja-śabda-vibhavair abhiṣecanādyaiḥ</l>

<l n="c"><lb n="15"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> nitāḥ parama-tuṣti-puraskr̥tena<!--

nitāḥ sic, Bhandarkar emends to nitaḥ, restores saṁmānitaḥ (probably Sircar too, not checked)

--></l>

<l n="d"><lb n="16"/><seg met="++-"><gap reason="lost" quantity="3" unit="character"/></seg> vo nr̥patir aprativāryya-vīryyaḥ <num value="4">4</num><!--

Sircar reconstructs the first 4 syllables as so yaṁ dhruvo, Bhandarkar as bhūvāsavo

--></l>

</lg>

<l n="a"><lb n="17"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> sya pauruṣa-parākkrama-datta-śulkā<!--

Sircar reconstructs the first 3 syllables as dattāsya, Bhandarkar śrīr asya and argues against reading the verse as about his wife. Agrawal_1986:16 says this interpretation with śrī had come from Mirashi, and Sadhu Ram had argued against it saying the verse must be about a human being. Agrawala cites personifications of śrī from poetry to underline the point that it is about śrī. Everybody seems to ignore that there appears to be a character kaṁ or kraṁ at the end of l16 which, if not noise, belongs to the beginning of this quarter (in which case l9 is not the only one where the pāda end does not coincide with a line end).

--></l>

<l n="b"><lb n="18"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> śva-ratna-dhana-dhānya-samr̥ddhi-yuktā<!--

Bhandarkar (following Sircar) reconstructs the first 3 syllables as hasty-aśva

--></l>

<l n="c" enjamb="yes"><lb n="19"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> ṅgr̥heṣu muditā bahu-putra-pautra<!--

Bhandarkar (following Sircar) reconstructs the beginning as nityaṅ gr̥heṣu

--></l>

<l n="d"><lb n="20" break="no"/>-<supplied reason="lost">sa</supplied>ṅkrāmiṇī kulavadhū<sic>ḥ</sic> vratinī niviṣṭā <num value="5">5</num></l>

</lg>

<l n="a"><lb n="21"/><supplied reason="lost" cert="low">yasyo</supplied>rjjitaṁ samara-karmma parākrameddhaṁ</l>

<l n="b"><lb n="22"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> yaśaḥ suvipulam paribambhramīti<!--

Sircar reconstructs the first 2 syllables as pr̥thvyāṁ, Bhandarkar as śuklaṁ/śukraṁ

--></l>

<l n="c"><lb n="23"/><seg met="++"><gap reason="lost" quantity="2" unit="character"/></seg> ṇi yasya ripavaś ca raṇorjjitāni<!--

Sircar reconstructs the first 2 syllables as kāryāṇi, Bhandarkar as karmāṇi (if we do give conjectures in XML, I'd rather double the consonant after y) and anyway, why not vīryāṇi or something else while we are at it?

--></l>

<l n="d"><lb n="24"/><supplied reason="lost">sva</supplied>pnāntareṣv api vicintya paritrasanti <num value="6">6</num></l>

</lg>

<l n="b"><seg met="+"><gap reason="lost" quantity="1" unit="character"/></seg> <unclear>pta</unclear>ḥ sva-bhoga-nagarairikiṇa-pradeśe<!--

Bhandarkar reconstructs the beginning of the second pāda as prāptaḥ. Lielukhine has stambhaḥ, with sta marked as conjecture and mbha as an uncertain reading. This is probably not from Sircar, since Bhandarkar does not note this as Sircar's reading

--><!--

Bhandarkar p224n1: Fleet observes that because of the lacunae, "sva" in l25 might refer to some feudatory rather then Samudra. Bhandarkar disagrees because "the lacunae can very well be filled up" as he wants to - but I think can is far from equal to must and Fleet's caution is due

--></l>

<l n="d"><supplied reason="lost">saṁ</supplied><unclear>sth</unclear>āpitas sva-yaśasaḥ paribr̥<sic>ṅ</sic>hanārttham <num value="7">7</num><!--

saṁsth is marked as unclear, not conjectural in Bhandarkar, but in fact there is no trace of saṁ and sthā is none too clear either

--><!--

Bhandarkar does not print the 7 at the end of this line, but it's very clearly there. Fleet 1888 does print it and Bhandarkar does mention it in text p221.

--></l>

</lg>

<l n="b"><seg met="++-"><gap reason="lost" quantity="3" unit="character"/></seg> vo nr̥patir āha yadā <seg met="-+="><gap reason="lost" quantity="3" unit="character"/></seg></l>

</lg>

</p><!--

I've added one lost half-verse to complete the stanza and supplied its number, which would have been there in the original. Any number of further verses may have been lost.

--></div>

<lem/>

</app>

</listApp>

</div>

</div>

</div>

<p/>

</listBibl>

</listBibl>

</div>

</body>

</text>

</TEI>