Stela of Duol Srae Bhūmi (K. 1050), 854 Śaka

Editors: Salomé Pichon, Saveros Pou, Gerdi Gerschheimer.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSCIK01050.

Hand description:

The scribe alternates between single and double-upstrokes ra.

The scribe makes scanty use of numerotation, and alternates between "regular" numbers and daṇḍa in order to count in the inscription.

It is interesting to note that there is no absolute rule for the position of the i on the p: while in lines A 8, 20, 21 and 23 and B 2, the sign of the vowel is placed on the second shaft of the p of pi (see also krapi, l. A 19, and priti, l. A 19), it is placed here on the 1st.

The 1st line of face B is very altered, to the point that one can wonder if the engraving was completed: the outline of the letters is finer than elsewhere, perhaps revealing a first trial of the lapicide, abandoned before he performed the complete engraving. It is possible that the hand is different from that of the rest of the inscription. In both cases, we should continuously read from the line A23 to the line B2.

Languages: Old Khmer, Sanskrit.

Repository: Khmer (tfc-khmer-epigraphy).

Version: (686f981), last modified (e71eaed).

Edition

⟨Face A⟩ ⟨A1⟩ || siddhi svasti◯ Oṁ namaś śivāya◯

⟨A2⟩ ◯ 854 śaka° nu mrateñ· vaktraśiva dulau ⟨A3⟩ nā vraḥ kaṁmrateṅ· Añ· parameśvara° paṅgaṁ ⟨A4⟩ thpvaṅ· nivedana° gi sruk· bhūmyākara nā pa⟨A5⟩ṅgva¿ṁy?⟨y⟩· vāp· śiveśvara (ta) khl(ā)y· (day·) nuva Upā⟨A6⟩ya nuva | khñuṁma n(u)va dravya phoṅ¡a!⟨·⟩ nuva sre ta ⟨A7⟩ ti vāp· śiveśvara thbe nuva sre nirmmūla nuva sre mr̥⟨A8⟩takadhana° svaṁ pi thbe caṁnāṁ ta vraḥ kaṁmrateṅ· ⟨A9⟩ Añ· parameśvara cāṁ tandula Eka prastha pratidi⟨A10⟩na° mān· vraḥ [śā]sana dhūlī vraḥ pāda dhūlī jeṅ· ⟨A11⟩ vraḥ kaṁmrateṅ· Añ·° pre pratyaya mo(k)· sa⟨A12⟩ṅ· praśasta ta gi sruk· saṅ gol· ta gi sre Oy ta ⟨A13⟩ mrateñ· vaktraśiva dulau nā vraḥ kamrate⟨14⟩ṅ· Añ· parameśvara° nuva Upāya nuva dra⟨A15⟩vya phoṅa pre thbe caṁnāṁ vraḥ kaṁmrateṅ· Añ· ⟨A16⟩ parameśvara nu gi◯ sre (ja)nārddana ° sre cik su ⟨A17⟩ bh(ega)° sre kadamva ° ⟨⟨sre sru srāl·⟩⟩ sre phle sruk° sre ka⟨A18⟩ntāl· vala + khñuṁ gho IIII rat· I° tai IIIII kvan· III ⟨A19⟩ th[mu]r· 4° krapi IIII° prīti Anuktāgama siddhi(°) ⟨A20⟩ pi pre ta gi kāryya vraḥ kaṁmrateṅ· Añ· pa⟨A21⟩ra(m)eśva(ra°) neḥ bhūmyākara neḥ vvaṁ jā pi svata⟨A22⟩ntra ta khloñ[·] vrihi° vvaṁ jā pi svatantra ta ⟨A23⟩ khloñ· kandvār· cralo° vvaṁ jā pi svatantra⟨Face B⟩ ⟨B1⟩ ta pratyaya (lṅo) [.]au [vvaṁ jā pi svatan](tra) ⟨B2⟩ ta pratyaya paryaṅ·° vvaṁ jā pi svatantra ⟨B3⟩ nā mvāy· dai ti leṅa nā vraḥ kaṁmrateṅ¡a!⟨·⟩ ⟨B4⟩ Añ· parameśvara gus·° vvaṁ Āc ti Ācā⟨B5⟩ryya khloñ· vnaṁ pre qnak· noḥ ta gi kāryya ⟨B6⟩ ta dai ti thmā thbe caṁnāṁ noḥh· gus·° Ā⟨B7⟩yatta ta mrateñ· vaktraśiva dulau nu⟨B8⟩va kula (d)ai [2×] yajamāna Ukka✤ ⟨B9⟩ ◯ kalpanā paryaṅ· mās· I ⟨B10⟩ lṅo liḥ 5 pratisaṁvatsara◯

I. Āryā

⟨B11⟩ ◯ syālaś śiveśvaro yo ⟨B12⟩ mr̥tas tadīyaṁ pa(r)igra(ha)m aśe[ṣaṁ]

ab

⟨B13⟩ parameśvarapūjārtha ⟨B14⟩ n nr̥pājñayāvāpa vaktraśivaḥ (◯)

cd

Apparatus

⟨A2⟩ 854 ⬦ 835 ?.

⟨A3⟩ parameśvara° paṅgaṁ • S. Pou do not note the punctuation mark, evident on all documents, between parameśvara and paṅgaṁ.

⟨A4⟩ paṅgva¿ṁy?⟨y⟩· ⬦ […] Pou2001_01 • The presence of a pa (clearer on the picture of the stone than on the estampages) after the akṣara nā is certain. In the following ṅgvaṁy·, the element gv and the virāma are almost certain, the others very likely. It seems that the syllable ṅgva is surmounted by an anusvāra (maybe because the lapicide has first written paṅgaṁ ?), but this one should be erased. Furthermore,between the upstroke of the ya and the virāma figures an element which doesn’t look erased. Indeed, the remaining of this line’s text, until nuva excluded, is evidently re-written over a first engraving, of which we still see some traces.

⟨A5⟩ śiveśvara • This sequence (thus edited in the NIC II and already noted by Jacques 1971: 186), seems to have been rewritten on a first engraving, which makes it difficult to read: the element ve does not present a "canonical" form of the e ; a sign similar to an l appears below it (see also l. A6). On the ra is a small horizontal bar which is probably a remnant of an early engraving, rather than a virāma. — ⟨A5⟩ (ta) khl(ā)y· ⬦ ta khloñ Pou2001_01 • The whole sequence seems to be rewritten on the first engraving, which makes its interpretation uncertain. However, it seems impossible to see a ñ at the end of the sequence, and the character y, with a virāma, looks quite clear; but it is accompanied by a subscribed element which appears to be gv, and which would have belonged to the first engraving. The khl ligature, quite clean, is flanked to its right by the vertical element of an ā, and surmounted by a loop which does not present the shape of a first element of an o, and which I interpret as a trace of a first engraving. In conclusion, I propose to recognize in the word targeted by the stoning the term khlāy (variant for khlai), "brother-in-law" (?). This conjecture is of course based on the fact that the Sanskrit part (side B, l. 11-14) teaches us that "Siveśvara is, precisely, the syāla of Vaktraśiva (i.e. his brother-in-law, more precisely his wife’s brother). — ⟨A5⟩ (day·) ⬦ duñ Pou2001_01 • Very uncertain reading. However, it does not seem that one can read duñ: the mark of the u under what seems to be a d is almost non-existent (especially compared to the highly pronounced u of the many nuva and of dulau, l. A2 and A13) and what had been read ñ in the NIC II is more like a y with virāma. But I don’t know what to do with day·. [Note also that the "virāma", if it is indeed one, could belong to the "1st engraving", and that it could then be read daya.]

⟨A6⟩ | khñuṁma n(u)va ⬦ khñuṁ nuv Pou2001_01 • The presence of the akṣara ma, omitted in the NIC II, is certain. Note also that the interlinear sign similar to an l appearing under the element ve of l. A5 (not noted in the NIC II) is found between the syllables nu and va.

⟨A7⟩ ti ⬦ gi Pou2001_01 • The word is not legible on EFEO estampages n.1398 (the one used by S. Pou) and n. **** [Dam Chhoeurn] (only the right part of the grapheme remains). — ⟨A7⟩ thbe ⬦ thve Pou2001_01. — ⟨A7⟩ mr̥takadhana° ⬦ mr̥taka man Pou2001_01.

⟨A8⟩ thbe ⬦ thve Pou2001_01.

⟨A9⟩ prastha ⬦ praṣtha Pou2001_01.

⟨A11⟩ Añ·° ⬦ Añ Pou2001_01. — ⟨A11⟩ pratyaya ⬦ pratya Pou2001_01.

⟨A13⟩ kamrateṅ ⬦ kaṁmrateṅ Pou2001_01.

⟨A14⟩ parameśvara° ⬦ parameśvara Pou2001_01.

⟨A15⟩ thbe ⬦ thve Pou2001_01 • The writting of this b is different from that of the thbe of l. A7 and l. A8.

⟨A16⟩ (ja)nārddana ⬦ janārdana ?; janāṅ dāna Pou2001_01 • The NIC II interpreted the mark of the above r as an extension of the vowel (ā), and the first d as a ṅ. In fact, only the syllable read here ja is of dubious interpretation. — ⟨A16⟩ cik su bh(ega) ⬦ cikṣubhe ?; cikṣu […] Pou2001_01 • Perhaps it is necessary to read - or correct with - o the vowel read here e: cf. the o of cralo, in l. A23.

⟨A17⟩ ⟨⟨sre sru srāl·⟩⟩ ⬦ […] Pou2001_01 • G. Gerschheimer notices this addition below the l. A17. However what he interprets to be a final daṇḍa potentially crossed, appears to be a mark destined to indicate where in the line to add this ricefield. — ⟨A17⟩ kantāl· va(sa/la) ⬦ kandāl vas ?; kantāl sras sre […] Pou2001_01 • It seems there is a confusion in NIC II with the words of the interlinear addition.

⟨A18⟩ rat· I° ⬦ rat· I Pou2001_01. — ⟨A18⟩ Anuktāgama ⬦ Anuttarāgama Pou2001_01.

⟨A22⟩ vrihi ⬦ vrīhi Pou2001_01.

⟨A23⟩ cralo • The writting of the o is distinct from that of the o of, for example, khloñ as from that of the o of gho (l. 18), and approximates that of an au.

⟨B1⟩ (lṅo) [.]au [vvaṁ jā pi svatan](tra) ⬦ […] Pou2001_01.

⟨B6⟩ thbe ⬦ thve Pou2001_01.

⟨B8⟩ va kula (d)ai [2×] ⬦ […] Pou2001_01.

⟨B10⟩ lṅo ⬦ lṅau Pou2001_01.

Translation into French by Pou2001_01

(A1) Succès, bonheur ! Oṁ, hommage à Śiva !

(A2–A10) En 854 śaka, Mrateñ Vaktraśiva Dulau, chargé du service de V.K.A. Parameśvara, se prosterne pour informer le roi des terres et de leurs ressources à -----, achetées de Vāp Śiveśvara, Khloñ ; des divers moyens de subsistance, serviteurs et autres biens ; des rizières que Vāp Śiveśvara avait cultivées ; des rizières sans propriétaires et des rizières d’héritage qu’il demande humblement à cultiver [dorénavant]. Fournitures au dieu Parameśvara : 1 prastha de riz par jour.

(A10–A16) Sa Majesté notre seigneur daigna donner l’ordre de commander à un homme de confiance de venir ériger une inscription en [ce] village, de planter des bornes à l’endroit des rizières à octroyer à Mrateñ Vaktraśiva Dulau chargé de V.K.A. Parameśvara, en mentionnant les moyens de subsistance et autres biens, et en prescrivant des prestations à fournir à V.K.A. Parameśvara.

(A16–A23) Voici les rizières : Janāṅ Dāna, Cikṣu, ------, Kadamva, Phle Sruk, Kantāl Sras, et ------ ; et les serviteurs : 4 gho, 1 rat, 5 tai avec 3 enfants ; [enfin] 4 bœufs, 4 buffles. Bienvenue et succès aux excellents visiteurs ! D’après l’ordre du roi, que [tout cela] soit désormais utilisé pour le service de V.K.A. Parameśvara. Les ressources de ces terres ne dépendront point du responsable du riz, ni du responsable des bureaux de perception, ni -------

Commentary

Except from when I indicate it, most of the note in the apparatus where made by G. Gerschheimer.

Bibliography

First edited in French by Saveros Pou (Pou2001_01). Re-edited here, first by Gerdi Gerschheimer, then by Salomé Pichon based on EFEO estampage n. 1396, n. **** [Dam Chhoeurn] and two photographs of the stone sent by Bertrand Porte.

Primary

Pou2001_01

Secondary

Jacques, Claude. 1971. “Supplément au tome VIII des Inscriptions du Cambodge.” BEFEO 58, pp. 177–195. DOI: 10.3406/befeo.1971.5080. [URL]. Page 183.