1<?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_Schema.rng" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron"?>
·<?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"?>
5<?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"?>
·<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:lang="eng">
· <teiHeader>
· <fileDesc>
10 <titleStmt>
· <title>Stela found during excavation in Oc Eo archaeological site (An Giang Province, Vietnam) (K. 1426), 7th century CE</title>
· <respStmt>
· <resp>EpiDoc Encoding</resp>
· <persName ref="part:kuch">
15 <forename>Kunthea</forename>
· <surname>Chhom</surname>
· </persName>
· </respStmt>
· <respStmt>
20 <resp>intellectual authorship of edition</resp>
· <persName ref="part:kuch">
· <forename>Kunthea</forename>
· <surname>Chhom</surname>
· </persName>
25 <persName ref="part:dogo">
· <forename>Dominic</forename>
· <surname>Goodall</surname>
· </persName>
· <persName ref="part:argr">
30 <forename>Arlo</forename>
· <surname>Griffiths</surname>
· </persName>
· </respStmt>
· </titleStmt>
35 <publicationStmt>
· <authority>DHARMA</authority>
· <pubPlace>Siem Reap</pubPlace>
· <idno type="filename">DHARMA_INSCIK01426</idno>
· <availability>
40 <licence target="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
· <p>This work is licenced under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported Licence. To view a copy of the licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA.</p>
· <p>Copyright (c) 2019-2025 by Kunthea Chhom.</p>
· </licence>
· </availability>
45 <date from="2019" to="2025">2019-2025</date>
· </publicationStmt>
· <sourceDesc>
· <msDesc>
· <msIdentifier>
50 <repository>DHARMAbase</repository>
· <idno/>
·
· </msIdentifier>
· <msContents>
55 <summary>
· <p>Face A contains seven Sanskrit stanzas in anuṣṭubh meter. The first is an invocation to the Buddha. Stanzas II and III praise the fieriness and righteousness of the ruling king Jayavarman I. The raison d’être of the inscription is mentioned in stanzas IV and V: these constitute an edict of King Jayavarman I concerning a monastery called Candana “sandalwood” <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>candana-vihāra</foreign></supplied> and they decree the use of funds <supplied reason="explanation">not given by the king</supplied> for the annual procession of the image of the Buddha on the full moon day of the month of Vaiśākha <supplied reason="explanation">April-May</supplied>. Stanzas VI and VII stipulate that the slaves, cows, buffaloes, gardens, fields, servants, etc., given to the Buddha are not to be stolen and are under the protection of the Governor of Tamandarapura.</p>
· <p>Face B is a fourteen-line text in Old Khmer. It echoes the Sanskrit text in what is said about the annual procession of the Buddha’s statue of Candana Monastery on the full moon day of Vaiśākha as an order of King Jayavarman I. It also provides details of the management of the wealth of the monastery including servants, slaves, cows, buffaloes etc. The last two lines warn that those who flout the order of the king shall be punished.</p>
· </summary>
·
60 </msContents>
· <physDesc>
· <handDesc>
· <p>The lettering is characteristic of the seventh century CE.
· </p>
65
·
·
·
·
70 </handDesc>
· </physDesc>
· </msDesc>
· </sourceDesc>
· </fileDesc>
75 <encodingDesc>
· <projectDesc>
· <p>The project DHARMA has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC)
· under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant
· agreement no 809994).</p>
80 </projectDesc>
· <schemaRef type="guide" key="EGDv01" url="https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02888186"/>
· <listPrefixDef>
· <prefixDef ident="bib" matchPattern="([a-zA-Z0-9\-\_]+)" replacementPattern="https://www.zotero.org/groups/1633743/erc-dharma/items/tag/$1">
· <p>Public URIs with the prefix bib to point to a Zotero Group Library named
85 ERC-DHARMA whose data are open to the public.</p>
· </prefixDef>
· <prefixDef ident="part" matchPattern="([a-z]+)" replacementPattern="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/erc-dharma/project-documentation/master/DHARMA_IdListMembers_v01.xml#$1">
· <p>Internal URIs using the part prefix to point to person elements in the
· <ref>DHARMA_IdListMembers_v01.xml</ref> file.</p>
90 </prefixDef>
· </listPrefixDef>
· </encodingDesc>
· <revisionDesc>
· <change who="part:kuch" when="2023-11-07" status="draft">Adding modifications to edition, translation, commentary and apparatus</change>
95 <change who="part:kuch" when="2023-10-19" status="draft">Adding paleographical remark and modifications to edition and apparatus</change>
· <change who="part:kuch" when="2023-03-23" status="draft">Slight modifications to edition</change>
· <change who="part:kuch" when="2023-03-13" status="draft">Modifications to edition</change>
· <change who="part:axja" when="2020-11-03" status="draft">Updating toward the encoding template v03</change>
· <change who="part:kuch" when="2020-05-19">Initial encoding of the inscription</change>
100 <change who="part:axja" when="2020-04-08" status="draft">Creation of updated template</change>
· </revisionDesc>
· </teiHeader>
· <text xml:space="preserve">
· <body>
105 <div type="edition" xml:lang="okz-Latn" rendition="class:83231 maturity:83211">
·<div type="textpart" n="A"><head xml:lang="eng">Face</head>
· <lg n="1" met="anuṣṭubh" xml:lang="san-Latn">
·<l n="a" enjamb="yes" real="-+-+----"><lb n="A1"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>jayaty aśeṣa-bhuva<choice><sic>ṇ</sic><corr>n</corr></choice>a</l>
·<l n="b"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>-dhvānta-dhvaṅsana-bhāskaraḥ</l>
110<l n="c" enjamb="yes" real="-+-+----"><lb n="A2"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>jino vineya-kamala</l>
·<l n="d"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>-pravodha-prathitodayaḥ</l>
·</lg>
· <lg n="2" met="anuṣṭubh" xml:lang="san-Latn">
·<l n="a" enjamb="yes"><lb n="A3"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>dagdhe sva-tejasaivāri</l>
115<l n="b"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>-vaṅśe nir-avaśeṣataḥ</l>
·<l n="c" real="-+-+---+"><lb n="A4"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>vane '<unclear>p</unclear>i ka<unclear>ṇṭa</unclear>ka-bhaya<milestone unit="column" n="b" break="no"/>m</l>
·<l n="d">prajā yasya na lebhire</l>
·</lg>
· <lg n="3" met="anuṣṭubh" xml:lang="san-Latn">
120<l n="a" enjamb="yes"><lb n="A5"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>catur-āśramiṇā<unclear>ṁ</unclear> dharmma</l>
·<l n="b"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>-samatām ānayan prajā<unclear>ḥ</unclear></l>
·<l n="c"><lb n="A6"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>yas samānārthatāyogā<milestone unit="column" n="b" break="no"/>t</l>
·<l n="d">tulā-daṇḍa Ivābhavat·</l>
·</lg>
125 <lg n="4" met="anuṣṭubh" xml:lang="san-Latn">
·<l n="a"><lb n="A7"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>tena rājādhirājena</l>
·<l n="b"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>nāmnā śrī-jayavarmmaṇā</l>
·<l n="c"><lb n="A8"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>śrī-candana-vihārāya</l>
·<l n="d"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>dattam arthāya śāsanam·</l>
130</lg>
· <lg n="5" met="anuṣṭubh" xml:lang="san-Latn">
·<l n="a"><lb n="A9"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>mādhave mādhave māsi</l>
·<l n="b"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>pūrṇṇodita-niśākare</l>
·<l n="c" enjamb="yes" real="-+-++--+"><lb n="A10"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/><supplied reason="lost">ta</supplied>thāgatasya pratimā</l>
135<l n="d"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>-gamanan niyatotsavaṁ</l>
·</lg>
· <lg n="6" met="anuṣṭubh" xml:lang="san-Latn">
·<l n="a" real="++++----"><lb n="A11"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/><supplied reason="lost">Eta</supplied><unclear>s</unclear><supplied reason="lost">y</supplied><unclear>ai</unclear> kena cid api</l>
·<l n="b"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>śraddhayā pratipāditaṁ</l>
140<l n="c" enjamb="yes"><lb n="A12"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>dāsa-go-<unclear>mah</unclear>i<unclear>ṣ</unclear>ārāma</l>
·<l n="d"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>-kṣetra-karmmakarādi yat·</l>
·</lg>
· <lg n="7" met="anuṣṭubh" xml:lang="san-Latn">
·<l n="a"><lb n="A13"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>tad ahāryyam asa<supplied reason="lost">ṁ</supplied>bho<unclear>g</unclear>ya<milestone unit="column" n="b" break="no"/>m</l>
145<l n="b">anivāryyaṁ sva-karmmasu</l>
·<l n="c" enjamb="yes"><lb n="A14"/><milestone unit="column" n="a"/>tamandarapurādhyakṣa</l>
·<l n="d"><milestone unit="column" n="b"/>-bhāro ya<unclear>m avagam</unclear><supplied reason="lost">yatām·</supplied></l>
·</lg>
·</div>
150<div type="textpart" n="B"><head xml:lang="eng">Face</head>
·<p>
·<lb n="B1"/>Ājñā vraḥ kamratāṅ· Añ· ni roḥ parihāra man·
·<lb n="B2"/>Oy· ta nā vraḥ kamratāṅ· Añ· śrīcandana<lb n="B3" break="no"/>vihāra <space/> gan· vnok· vraḥ kamratāṅ· Añ· dai lah·
·<lb n="B4"/>gan ta saṁ paribhoga lah· <space/> gan· pradāna qnak·
155<lb n="B5"/>lah· pre gui siddhi ta vraḥ kamratāṅ· Añ·
·<lb n="B6"/>pre ge ta kloñ ñan· Ai taṁrāṅ· tve prāsāda pan·<lb n="B7" break="no"/>ter· vraḥ ta gui pūrṇṇamī vaiśākha cracar· cnaṁ
·<lb n="B8"/>voṁ pre hau pak· tok· cmap· vnas· Aṁvi ta ge
·<lb n="B9"/>qnak· vrahha <space/> kñuṁ tmur· krapī daṁriṅ· tpal·
·<lb n="B10"/>sre karoṁ dok· <space/> voṁ tel· pre qnak· cralak·
160<lb n="B11"/><supplied reason="lost">voṁ</supplied> pre pāk· slā voṁ pre knar· c<unclear>k</unclear>op· ge voṁ
·<lb n="B12"/><supplied reason="lost">dap·</supplied> qnak· naṁ pitai col· <supplied reason="lost">ka</supplied><unclear>ṁl</unclear>uṅa Aṅgana
·<lb n="B13"/>ge <supplied reason="lost">ta ce</supplied>r· gui ne<unclear>ḥ pa</unclear>r<supplied reason="lost">i</supplied>hāra ta roḥ gui nehha
·<lb n="B14"/>ge <unclear cert="low">ce</unclear><supplied reason="lost">r· Ā</supplied><unclear>jñā</unclear> vraḥ kamratāṅ· Añ· ge daṇḍa
· </p>
165 </div>
· </div>
·
·
·
170
·
·
·
·
175
·
· <div type="translation" resp="part:kuch part:dogo part:argr">
· <p rend="stanza" n="1">He is victorious <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>jayati</foreign></supplied>, the Buddha <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>jinaḥ</foreign></supplied>, a sun to destroy darkness <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>dhvānta-dhvaṅsana-bhāskaraḥ</foreign></supplied> throughout the world <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>aśeṣa-bhuvana-</foreign></supplied>, whose rise is proclaimed by the awakening of his lotus-like disciples <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vineya-kamala-prabodha-prathitodayaḥ</foreign></supplied>.</p>
· <p rend="stanza" n="2">After he burnt <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>dagdhe</foreign></supplied> completely <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>nir-avaśeṣataḥ</foreign></supplied> the race of his enemies <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>ari-vaṅśe</foreign></supplied> merely <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>eva</foreign></supplied> by his fieriness <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>sva-tejasā</foreign></supplied>, his subjects <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>prajāḥ</foreign></supplied> experienced <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>lebhire</foreign></supplied> no <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>na</foreign></supplied> fear of thorns <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>kaṇṭaka-bhayam</foreign></supplied> even <supplied reason="subaudible">when they were</supplied> in a forest <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vane ’pi</foreign></supplied>.</p>
180 <p rend="stanza" n="3">Leading <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>ānayan</foreign></supplied> his subjects <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>prajāḥ</foreign></supplied> to a state of being in balance with the Dharma <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>dharma-samatām</foreign></supplied> of those belonging to the four <supplied reason="subaudible">orthodox</supplied> walks of life <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>catur-āśramiṇām</foreign></supplied>, he became <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>abhavat</foreign></supplied>, it seemed <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>iva</foreign></supplied>, <supplied reason="subaudible">impartial</supplied> like the rod of a pair of scales <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>tulā-daṇḍaḥ</foreign></supplied>, because he possessed a sense of each <supplied reason="subaudible">walk of life</supplied> being of equal value <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>samānārthatāyogāt</foreign></supplied>.</p>
· <p rend="stanza" n="4">This <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>tena</foreign></supplied> overlord of kings <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>rājādhirājena</foreign></supplied>, by name the illustrious <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>śrī</foreign></supplied> Jayavarman, gave <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>dattam</foreign></supplied> the <supplied reason="subaudible">following</supplied> charter <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>śāsanam</foreign></supplied> for the sake of wealth <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>arthāya</foreign></supplied> <supplied reason="subaudible">given</supplied> for the benefit of the venerable <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>śrī</foreign></supplied> Sandalwood Monastery <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>candana-vihāra</foreign></supplied>:</p>
· <p rend="stanza" n="5">“In spring <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>mādhave</foreign></supplied>, in the month of Mādhava <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>mādhave māsi</foreign></supplied> <supplied reason="subaudible">i.e., Vaiśākha</supplied>, when the risen moon is full <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>pūrṇṇodita-niśākare</foreign></supplied>, the procession of the image <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>pratimā-gamanam</foreign></supplied> of the Buddha<supplied reason="subaudible">'s statue</supplied> <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>tathāgatasya</foreign></supplied> is to have a fixed festival <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>niyatotsavam</foreign></supplied>.”</p>
· <p rend="stanza" n="6">“<supplied reason="subaudible">And</supplied> whatever <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>yat</foreign></supplied> is dedicated <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>pratipāditam</foreign></supplied> to this <supplied reason="subaudible">image</supplied> <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>etasyai</foreign></supplied>, out of devotion <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>śraddhayā</foreign></supplied> — slaves, cows, buffaloes, gardens, fields, servants and so forth <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>dāsa-go-mahiṣārāma-kṣetra-karmmakarādi</foreign></supplied> — by anybody at all <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>kena cid api</foreign></supplied>,</p>
· <p rend="stanza" n="7">“... that <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>tad</foreign></supplied> is not to be stolen <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>ahāryam</foreign></supplied>, not to be enjoyed <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>asambhogyam</foreign></supplied>, not to be withheld <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>anivāryam</foreign></supplied> for <supplied reason="subaudible">the accomplishment of some individual’s</supplied> own works <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>sva-karmasu</foreign></supplied>. May <supplied reason="subaudible">the responsibility of ensuring</supplied> <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>ayam</foreign></supplied> be understood <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>avagamyatām</foreign></supplied> to be the burden <supplied reason="subaudible">of duty</supplied> <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>bhāra</foreign></supplied> of the Governor of Tamandarapura <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>tamandara-purādhyakṣa-bhāraḥ</foreign></supplied>.”</p>
185 <p n="B1-B12">Order of My Lord concerning the modalities <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>roḥ</foreign></supplied> of management <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>parihāra</foreign></supplied>,
· <list>
· <item>assigning <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>oy</foreign></supplied> to My Lord <supplied reason="explanation">the Buddha</supplied> of the venerable Sandalwood Monastery some laborers of other Lords, some <supplied reason="explanation">laborers</supplied> who are a shared resource, <supplied reason="explanation">and</supplied> some who are gifts from people;</item>
· <item>enjoining that they become the exclusive property of My Lord <supplied reason="explanation">of the Sandalwood Monastery</supplied>;</item>
· <item>enjoining that Kloñ Ñan at Taṁrāṅ build a shrine <supplied reason="explanation">for</supplied> a procession on the Lord<supplied reason="subaudible">'s image</supplied> on the Full-moon Day of Vaiśākha, every year;</item>
190<item>forbidding that he summon to break <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>pak</foreign></supplied>, to uproot <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>tok</foreign></supplied>, to seize <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>cmap</foreign></supplied> more <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vnas</foreign></supplied> from the Lord's servants; </item>
· <item><supplied reason="subaudible">regarding</supplied> the slaves, cows, buffaloes, orchards, groves, low-lying rice fields, boats, absolutely forbidding that people cause damage <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>cralak</foreign></supplied>;</item>
·
· <item>forbidding that they break areca <supplied reason="explanation">palms</supplied>;</item>
· <item>forbidding that they obstruct taxation <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>ckop</foreign></supplied> of others;</item>
195 <item>absolutely forbidding that <foreign>naṁ pitai</foreign> people enter inside the precincts <supplied reason="explanation">of the Lord</supplied>.</item>
· </list>
· </p>
· <p n="B13-B14">Those who transgress the above <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>gui neḥ</foreign></supplied> — the modalities of management as above —, <supplied reason="explanation">i.e.</supplied> those who flout the order of My Lord, are punished.</p>
· </div>
200 <div type="commentary">
·
· <p>The stela appears to be of sandstone and measures 50 × 28 × 5 cm. Its upper silhouette has the shape of a downturned curly brace. The stela has no tenon at its base, but the bottom 15 cm were left blank, as though this part was originally intended to be inserted into the ground or into a stone mortise. When discovered, it lay on the ground, somehow broken into two fragments on one face and in four fragments on another. The pre-modern breakage has not been repaired yet. The stela is now kept in the storage room of Óc Eo Museum.<note>At the time we finish this article, none of us has yet had the chance to observe the stone directly. We rely on information shared by Nguyễn Khánh Trung Kiên <supplied reason="explanation">2019</supplied> and Đỗ Trường Giang <supplied reason="explanation">2023</supplied></note></p>
· <p>The stela is inscribed on its two broad faces, face A in Sanskrit verse and face B in Old Khmer prose. Both faces are decorated with a blossoming lotus above one or two strings of pearls <supplied reason="explanation">two on A, only one on B</supplied> at the top of fourteen lines of text and one string of pearls below the text on each face. The Khmer text runs continuously in one column whereas the Sanskrit one is arranged in two columns, even-numbered verse quarters <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>pāda</foreign></supplied>s in one and odd-numbered ones in the other. Both texts are written in an early form of Khmer script typical of the second half of the seventh century, without long descenders on the characters <foreign>ka</foreign> and <foreign>ra</foreign>. Since no other king going by the name Jayavarman is known to have ruled in the seventh century, it is clear that the king Jayavarman mentioned in the Sanskrit text must have been Jayavarman I <supplied reason="explanation">657–681 CE</supplied>. Besides its paleographic aspect, the inscription shares two main features of its content with other inscriptions of the same king: the opening expression <foreign>ājñā vraḥ kamratāṅ añ ni</foreign> “order of My Lord” <supplied reason="explanation">with addition of the particle ni where the inscriptions belonging to the reigns before and after use the phrase <foreign>ājñā vraḥ kamratāṅ añ</foreign> without said particle</supplied> and the details of the threat of punishment at the end of the Khmer portion.<note>For discussion of the characteristics of the inscriptions of King Jayavarman I, see Vickery (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Vickery1998_01"/><citedRange unit="page">26, 165–168</citedRange></bibl>), and for his dates see Goodall and Revire (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Goodall+Revire2021_01"/><citedRange unit="page">271</citedRange><citedRange unit="note">21</citedRange></bibl>).</note></p>
· <p>The character <foreign>ra</foreign> consists of a double stroke and does not extend farther down than the body of other characters. While the subscript of the character ṇa in the word pūrṇṇamī in the Khmer text and pūrṇṇodita- in the Sanskrit one still preserves the ‘‘x’’ shape <supplied reason="explanation">characteristic of the fifth and sixth centuries</supplied>, the character <foreign>ṇa</foreign> above it has the two sides of the ‘x’ split and connected by a stroke at the bottom. The decoration of the stela and the paleographic characteristics of the script present similarities with several other inscriptions of Jayavarman I. The stela from Phum Chrei <supplied reason="explanation">K. 563, Kompong Speu, 7th century CE</supplied>, for example, also has a decorative lotus at the top and a string of pearls below the text. The character ka does not have a long descendant loop, except the ones in the lines 9 and 12 of the Sanskrit text. The dominance of the ka without the descendant loop can also be found in the doorjamb from Tuol Kuk Preah <supplied reason="explanation"><ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00493.xml">K. 493</ref>, Prey Veng, 657 CE</supplied>; by contrast, the stela from Preah Kuhea Luong <supplied reason="explanation"><ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00044.xml">K. 44</ref>, Kampot, 674 CE</supplied> presents more characters ka with the descendant loop than the other type, whereas the two types are equally represented in <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00563.xml">K. 563</ref>. The shapes of the vowel-markers markers <foreign>i</foreign> and <foreign>ī</foreign>. The first one is written as a round small circle and the latter is slightly larger with a horizontal stroke in the middle. In some cases, the vowel marker <foreign>ī</foreign> appears like a spiral turning to the left, which is comparable to that in the inscription <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00493.xml">K. 493</ref>.</p>
205 <p rend="stanza" n="1">As Diwakar Acharya pointed out to us <supplied reason="explanation">personal communication of 28.vi.2023</supplied>, <foreign>vineya</foreign> could refer also to the king’s subjects <supplied reason="explanation">for cf. vinayādhāna in Raghuvaṁśa 1.24</supplied>. This means that a second punning interpretation is at least suggested, even if it is not perhaps meant to expand fully in the mind of the reader, in which the king is the subject of the stanza, his name, Jayavarman, being already adumbrated or suggested by the opening word:
· He is victorious, that Victor <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>jinaḥ</foreign></supplied>, a <supplied reason="subaudible">veritable</supplied> sun for destroying the darknesses of all the world, whose rise spreads out to awaken the lotuses that are <supplied reason="subaudible">his subjects who are</supplied> to be disciplined. For a handful of comparable instances of pre-Angkorian Śaiva inscriptions that open with a verse that is manifestly in praise of Śiva but that allow themselves also to be interpreted as referring to the ruling king, see Goodall and Revire (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Goodall+Revire2021_01"/><citedRange unit="page">270</citedRange></bibl>). This is a trope we find elsewhere, for instance in the 5th-century Guḍnāpur pillar inscription from Karnataka <supplied reason="explanation">India</supplied>, commemorating the creation and endowment of a temple of Kāmadeva. Its first verse, as Cecil and Gomes suggest (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Cecil+Gomes2021_01"/><citedRange unit="page">16</citedRange><citedRange unit="note">16</citedRange></bibl>), could describe both Kāma and the ruling king Ravivarman.</p>
· <p rend="stanza" n="2">The use of <foreign>kaṇṭaka</foreign> <supplied reason="explanation">literally “thorn”</supplied> to refer metaphorically to enemies or trouble-makers within the realm is an old cliché <supplied reason="explanation">see for example Raghuvaṁśa 14.73</supplied>. One is thus meant to understand <foreign>kaṇṭakabhayam</foreign> simultaneously as “fear of thorns” and “danger of trouble-makers”. Although the “burning of enemies” might in such a Buddhist context allude to the destruction of Māra, it seems more likely to us that this stanza speaks about the king. The correlative <foreign>yasya</foreign> shows that this stanza is to go with the next two stanzas which contain yas and then <foreign>tena</foreign>, each time denoting the king. The vocabulary <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>tejas</foreign>, <foreign>prajāḥ</foreign>, <foreign>arivaṁśe</foreign></supplied> also suggests that this stanza is only about the king.</p>
· <p rend="stanza" n="3">One could imagine a layer of meaning in which he “was <supplied reason="subaudible">straight</supplied> as the rod of a pair of scales because of <supplied reason="subaudible">the fact that he was engaged in cultivating</supplied> a meditative state of awareness that all things are of equal value”. Such a yogic awareness is spoken of as sāmarasya in Śaiva traditions, or as <foreign>śaktisamarasa</foreign> <supplied reason="explanation">e.g. in 5:36 of the Uttarasūtra of the Niśvāsatattvasaṃhitā and in 4:61 of the Nayasūtra, both edited in Goodall et al. (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Goodall+al2015_01"/></bibl>)</supplied>.</p>
· <p rend="stanza" n="4">As Diwakar Acharya observed to us <supplied reason="explanation">personal communication of 28.vi.2023</supplied>, the combination of a genitive and a dative <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>candanavihārasya arthāya</foreign></supplied> would be more normal for expressing this sense. Nonetheless, the first dative could be the result of attraction to the case of the second. Or we can interpret as we have, with two parallel purposive datives: “for wealth” and, at the same time, “for the vihāra”. He further suggested that arthāya might mean simply “for the purpose / sake of”. So “he gave this charter for the sake of the Śrī Candana Monastery”. Note that it is not said that the king made any donation himself. Pre-Angkorian inscriptions that record expenditure by the ruling king seem to be rare <supplied reason="explanation">Goodall (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Goodall2023_01"/><citedRange unit="page">27–36</citedRange></bibl></supplied>. Here no benefactor is mentioned, which perhaps suggests that the king’s edict relates to the disbursement of wealth that is regularly donated in small amounts by many individuals.</p>
210 <p rend="stanza" n="5">We could have taken the expression <foreign>mādhave mādhave</foreign> distributively to mean in “every month of Vaiśākha”, but since the element niyata- already expresses fixedness and therefore calendrical regularity, there is no need for the repetition of mādhave to express this. Indeed this repetition seems elegant precisely because the word is used in two different senses. Admittedly one could argue that <foreign>niyata</foreign>- is instead used to qualify the festival as “restrained”, in other words a ceremony in which the participants were expected to restrain themselves from sensual enjoyment and fix their minds on the Buddha and his teachings. But this might seem an anachronistically post-protestant interpretation, since Hindu and Buddhist festival processions often allow a joyful inversion of norms. This is furthermore arguably suggested by the opening <foreign>mādhave</foreign>, “In Springtime !...”, a time for joyous festivals all over the world from time immemorial.
· We have silently assumed that <foreign>pratimā-gamanam</foreign> is intended as a metrically expedient alternative to some more standard expression for a procession, such as <foreign>pratimāyātrā</foreign>, although it is just conceivable that it refers to “the approaching of the Buddha image <supplied reason="explanation">for veneration</supplied>” <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>pratimā-āgamanam</foreign></supplied>. Still, this is less likely, since the image, once installed, was presumably always there to be approached, not just on some calendrical festival. Festivals archetypically involve processions <supplied reason="explanation">in South India invariably so, to the point that utsava is often used to mean “procession”, e.g. in the expression <foreign>utsavamūrti</foreign></supplied>. For other allusions to religious processions in the Khmer epigraphical corpus, see <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00290.xml">K. 290</ref> <supplied reason="explanation">9th c., st. LXVI–LXVII, Buddhist</supplied>; <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00853.xml">K. 853</ref> <supplied reason="explanation">9th c., st. XIV, Śaiva</supplied>; <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00356.xml">K. 356</ref> <supplied reason="explanation">10th c., st. XI, a processional image, described as <foreign>utsavayāyin</foreign>, of a golden Viṣṇu mounted upon a silver Garuḍa</supplied>; <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00276.xml">K. 276</ref> <supplied reason="explanation">11th c., lines 4–6, Śaiva</supplied>; <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00277.xml">K. 277</ref> <supplied reason="explanation">11th c., lines 33–34, Śaiva</supplied>; <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01222.xml">K. 1222</ref> <supplied reason="explanation">12th c., Southern face, Śaiva</supplied>. See also the passages referred to by Bhattacharya in his brief discussion of the subject (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Bhattacharya1961_01"/><citedRange unit="page">89–91</citedRange></bibl>, to which we have alluded above. There are numerous other references of course to utsavas, such as a Śaiva one in <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00055.xml">K. 55</ref>, st. 14, which also belongs to the seventh century, but without explicit references to processions or processional images.
· </p>
· <p rend="stanza" n="6">As for <foreign>dāsa</foreign> and <foreign>karmakara</foreign> <supplied reason="explanation">which latter are presumably servants with a different legal status from the <foreign>dāsa</foreign>s, perhaps because they are not as completely owned</supplied>, the Śaiva author Brahmaśambhu draws this distinction in his Naimittikakriyānusandhāna of 938 CE. According to this text <supplied reason="explanation">f. 73v</supplied>, when the religious master <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>ācārya</foreign></supplied> transfers his responsibilities to his successor, he should say:
·
215<foreign>idaṁ sthānam iyaṁ vr̥ttir iyaṁ pustakasaṁhatiḥ
·amī vai bharaṇīyās tu dāsāḥ karmakarāś ca naḥ
·etat sarvaṁ mayā tubhyaṁ dattam adya tvayāpi ca
·pālanīyaṁ tathā samyag yathāsmābhiḥ prapālitam</foreign>
·
220“Such is the foundation; such is the revenue; such is the library; and these are the slaves and workers that are to be supported. All this I have given to you this day, and you should properly maintain it as I have done.”
·</p>
· <p rend="stanza" n="7">The Governor mentioned here is presumably one of the successors to Vidyāviśeṣa, the governor of Tamandarapura who authored <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00604.xml">K. 604</ref> and <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01235.xml">K. 1235</ref> in 627 CE <supplied reason="explanation">for editions and translations of which, see Goodall (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Goodall2019_01"/></bibl>)</supplied>. The fact that this figure is assigned the administrative burden of ensuring the correct use of these resources seems indeed to confirm that we may speak of him as a “governor” <supplied reason="explanation">as argued by Goodall, 2019 passim</supplied>. It was clear already that the various other mentions of Tamandarapura in the epigraphic corpus <supplied reason="explanation"><ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00009.xml">K. 9</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00604.xml">K. 604</ref> and <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01235.xml">K. 1235</ref></supplied>, when all taken together, suggested the location somewhere in South Vietnam. The discovery of <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01426.xml">K. 1426</ref> at Oc Eo might indicate that Tamandarapura was in fact the ancient name of Óc Eo. As for the nature of the compound name Tamandarapura, which, apart from the element -pura, does not seem to be Sanskrit, see the summary of past discussions given by Goodall (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Goodall2019_01"/><citedRange unit="page">29</citedRange></bibl>), quoting Vickery (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Vickery1998_01"/><citedRange unit="page">182–183</citedRange></bibl>) and correspondence with Griffiths, and see Chhom and Griffiths <supplied reason="explanation">forthcoming, p. 102</supplied>, where we conclude:
·
·While <foreign>pura</foreign> means ‘city’ in Sanskrit, the element <foreign>tamandara</foreign> is hard to explain in Sanskrit or Khmer and may perhaps reflect an indigenous language of the Austronesian family: in Malay, for instance, <foreign>taman darat</foreign> could mean ‘flatland garden’, and it is likely that a very similar expression also existed in the ancient Cham language. So the name may be an indication that the ethnolinguistic profile of the ancient Mekong Delta, and the polity of Fu-nan, included other people beside Khmers.
225</p>
· <p n="B4">Regarding the term <foreign>saṁ paribhoga</foreign>, the reproductions at our disposal make it imaginable that the dot we interpret as anusvāra is actually accidental, which would allow reading <foreign>saparibhoga</foreign>. Previous scholars have sometimes hesitated between <foreign>saṁ paribhoga</foreign> and <foreign>saparibhoga</foreign> <supplied reason="explanation">see e.g. the note in Cœdès 1936 on the inscription K. 6</supplied>. But it is probably undesirable to read <foreign>saparibhoga</foreign>, as the expression is attested multiple times with or without <foreign>p</foreign>- prefix as <foreign>psaṁ paribhoga</foreign>, often with clear presence of <foreign>anusvāra</foreign> <supplied reason="explanation">see further occurrences in the inscriptions <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00051.xml">K. 51</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00163.xml">K. 163</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00426.xml">K. 426</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00561.xml">K. 561</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00582.xml">K. 582</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00600.xml">K. 600</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00818.xml">K. 818</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00904.xml">K. 904</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00926.xml">K. 926</ref> and <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01275.xml">K. 1275</ref></supplied>.</p>
· <p n="B6">Taṁrāṅ is a rare toponym. In a variant spelling <supplied reason="explanation">of presumably trivial significance</supplied>, it appears, as Taṁraṅ in the inscription of Ban Hin Khon <supplied reason="explanation">Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand, 7th c.</supplied>. Is Taṁrāṅ the Khmer form of the Sanskrit Tamandara<supplied reason="subaudible">pura</supplied>? To give an example of the sometimes rather substantial differences between <supplied reason="explanation">presumably primary</supplied> vernacular names and their guise in Sanskrit context, we may first refer to the epigraphy of Campā, where Panrāṅ is the vernacular toponym to which Pāṇḍaraṅga <supplied reason="explanation">or Pāṇduraṅga</supplied> corresponds in other contexts <supplied reason="explanation">Griffiths and Southworth (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Griffiths+Southworth2011_01"/><citedRange unit="page">285–291</citedRange></bibl>)</supplied>. We are also reminded of the possible correspondence between the Sanskrit name Kāmaraṅga for Arakan <supplied reason="explanation">in present-day Burma</supplied> and the Old Burmese toponyms Kaṁ Raṁ or Kamḥ Yaṁ <supplied reason="explanation">(<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Griffiths2015_01"/><citedRange unit="page">307</citedRange></bibl>)</supplied>. If Taṁraṁ does indeed form a pair with Tamandara, then the Malay or Cham explanation of the latter, proposed just above, may need to be reconsidered, or else it must be assumed that the vernacular Khmer term came into existence only after the Sanskritization of an originally Austronesian name had taken place.</p>
· <p n="B6">Regarding ther term <foreign>kloñ ñan</foreign>, it might be read <foreign>kloñña n<unclear>aṁ</unclear></foreign> “superintendent of temple <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>naṁ</foreign> = <foreign>vnaṁ</foreign></supplied>” but this would yield a unique example of the word vnaṁ followed by the preposition <foreign>ai</foreign> “at”. Nevertheless, there are several examples in the pre-Angkorian inscriptions where <foreign>vnaṁ</foreign> stands in front of a name.</p>
· <p n="B7">The word cnaṁ is clearly the Old Khmer word meaning “year”, as found for instance in the inscription <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00090.xml">K. 90</ref> <supplied reason="explanation">Kampong Cham, 6th c., lines N7–10</supplied> <foreign>nivandha ge ta gui utsava ta pon hvat ta gui cnaṁ ta moyya</foreign> “Provision for the people at the four festival occasions in one year”. The word <foreign>cracar</foreign>, by contrast, is not recorded in Pou’s Old Khmer dictionary (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Pou2004_01"/></bibl>) while in Jenner’s dictionary of pre-Angkorian Khmer (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Jenner2009_02"/><citedRange unit="page">144</citedRange></bibl>), based on a single attestation in the inscription K. 1004 <supplied reason="explanation">Kandal, 691 CE</supplied>, it is analyzed as a derivation from the verb <foreign>car</foreign> “to write <supplied reason="explanation">note, jot</supplied> down in order”. However, in unpublished notes on that inscription, to which we have access, Jenner translates the word <foreign>cracar tṅai</foreign> “daily” <supplied reason="explanation">literally <foreign>cracar</foreign> “every” and <foreign>tṅai</foreign> “day”</supplied>. If our intuition is correct that the context in which the word <foreign>cracar</foreign> appears in the inscription <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01426.xml">K. 1426</ref> is comparable to the one where <foreign>cracar tṅai</foreign> appears in <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01004.xml">K. 1004</ref>, our translation of <foreign>cracar cnaṁ</foreign> as “every year” stands to reason. We would then propose a different morphological analysis from Jenner’s: <foreign>cracar</foreign> could be derived from the <supplied reason="explanation">otherwise unknown</supplied> Old Khmer antecedent of the word <foreign>cuor</foreign> word that means “line, row” in modern Khmer. With the prefix of intensification <foreign>cra</foreign>-, the resulting meaning could then be “one after another in a line or a row”, somewhat like the words “règle” and “régulier” in French which can refer both to straight lines and regularit<note>For a discussion of the prefixes <foreign>c</foreign>- and <foreign>cra</foreign>- in Khmer, see Jenne and Pou (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Jenner+Pou1980-1981_01"/><citedRange unit="page">xxxvii–xxxviii</citedRange></bibl>)</note>.</p>
230 <p n="B8">The word <foreign>cmap</foreign> is formed with the infix -<foreign>m</foreign>- whose original function seems to have been to create agent nouns, so <foreign>c-m-ap</foreign> “seizer” from cap “to seize” (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Griffiths2015_01"/><citedRange unit="page">307</citedRange></bibl>). However, it needs to be recognised that the inherited affixation of Khmer had already become fossilized to a certain degree by the stage of Old Khmer.<note>Cf. Jacob (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Jacob1976_01"/><citedRange unit="page">608</citedRange></bibl>): “The fossilization may be described as follows. Although the function of many Mod.K. words containing an O.K. affix could in a given context be recognized by means of the affix, there are also many words of similar construction in the use of which the original function does not operate any more. In addition to this, other, newer affixes have confused the picture. The infix m occurring between two consonants, for example, can be nominalizing or causative, at least since the Mid.K. period.”</note>
· In the context where cmap occurs in <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01426.xml">K. 1426</ref>, it is likely that the word functions as equivalent to the verb <foreign>cap</foreign> although the alternative interpretation as an agent noun cannot be entirely dismissed. The syntactic context is similar to that where <foreign>c-m-er</foreign> occurs, interchanging freely, it seems, with unaffixed <foreign>cer</foreign> “to transgress”, in the formulaic phrase of King Jayavarman I’s inscriptions: <foreign>ge cer/cmer ājñā vraḥ kamratāṅ añ ge daṇḍa</foreign>. This can be translated by “those who transgress the order of My Lord, are punished” if cmer is understood as a verb or “those who are transgressors of the order of My Lord, are punished” if it is taken as an agent noun.</p>
· <p n="B10">Like the word <foreign>cracar</foreign>, <foreign>cralak</foreign> is formed with the prefix of intensification <foreign>cra</foreign>-, here attached to the verb -<foreign>lak</foreign> “to cut a notch, groove, make an incision; to hollow out; to trim, clip; to cut into; to scratch, score, groove, mark; to incise, engrave; to gouge, chisel”. The resulting meaning “to cut intensely” underlies our interpretation “to cause damage” in the context of the inscription <supplied reason="explanation">(<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Jenner2009_02"/><citedRange unit="page">417</citedRange></bibl>)</supplied>. To date, the word <foreign>cralak</foreign> appears in three inscriptions, i.e. <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00502.xml">K. 502</ref> <supplied reason="explanation">Chanthaburi, 7th c.; this inscription is fragmentary</supplied>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01267.xml">K. 1267</ref> <supplied reason="explanation">Kompong Speu, 7th c.</supplied> and <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01426.xml">K. 1426</ref>. The context in which the term <foreign>cralak</foreign> appears in <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01267.xml">K. 1267</ref> seems to confirm our interpretation. The sentence <foreign>ge ta cralak gui paṅ tiṅ ti mās kaddi moy</foreign> can thus be translated as “Persons who cause damage <supplied reason="subaudible">to the donation of the king</supplied> shall pay a fine of one <foreign>kaṭṭi</foreign> of gold” <supplied reason="explanation">(<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Pou2001_01"/><citedRange unit="page">194</citedRange></bibl>)</supplied>.</p>
· <p n="B11">Analogously to the word <foreign>cmap</foreign> above, the noun <foreign>k-n-ar</foreign> is derived from the verb <foreign>kar</foreign> “to obstruct” with another affix, -<foreign>n</foreign>-, whose original function was likewise to form agent nouns, but contextually more likely to have been intended as a verb.</p>
· <p n="B12">The expression <foreign>qnak naṁ pitai</foreign> “<foreign>naṁ pitai</foreign> people” cannot be entirely understood: while the meaning of <foreign>qnak</foreign> “person” is certain, that of the word <foreign>pitai</foreign> remains obscure and the word naṁ might be a noun meaning “cake” or a verb meaning “to lead, bring, take”. According to Jenner (<bibl rend="omitname"><ptr target="bib:Jenner2009_02"/><citedRange unit="page">310</citedRange></bibl>), <foreign>pitai</foreign> is the name of an unidentified cake <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>naṁ</foreign></supplied> which was presumably offered to the dead. However, if one considers <foreign>naṁ</foreign> to be a verb, then pitai must be its object and it may no longer be assumed to be any kind of cake. The expression <foreign>qnak naṁ pitai</foreign> figures also in another inscription of King Jayavarman I, i.e. the stela of Preah Kuhea Luong <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK00044.xml">K. 44</ref>. The text alludes to the presence of some <foreign>naṁ pitai</foreign> people within the precincts of a sanctuary. Similarly, these people in <ref target="DHARMA_INSCIK01426.xml">K. 1426</ref> probably had the privilege of entering the precincts of the Lord.</p>
235 <p n="B12">The restitution of the world <foreign>dap</foreign> is based on both the meaning and the space on the stone. Given that the prohibitive word <foreign>dap</foreign> is followed by the word <foreign>pre</foreign> or <foreign>tel pre</foreign> in three previous phrases, the same wording is expected in the lost passage here. Nevertheless, the available space is too large for the word <foreign>pre</foreign> and too small for <foreign>tel pre</foreign>. The meaning of <foreign>dap</foreign> suits the context better than that of <foreign>pre</foreign> “to use, to order”.</p>
· <p/>
· </div>
· <div type="bibliography">
· <p>Edited by Kunthea Chhom, Dominic Goodall and Arlo Griffiths (forthcoming) from photos of stela and estampage received by email on 11 Oct. 2019 from Dr. Nguyễn Khánh Trung Kiên, Director - Center for Archaeology Southern Institute of Social Sciences, 49 Nguyen Thi Minh Khai, District 1, Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam.</p>
240 <listBibl type="primary">
· <bibl n="..">
· </bibl>
· </listBibl>
· </div>
245 </body>
· </text>
·</TEI>
Commentary
The stela appears to be of sandstone and measures 50 × 28 × 5 cm. Its upper silhouette has the shape of a downturned curly brace. The stela has no tenon at its base, but the bottom 15 cm were left blank, as though this part was originally intended to be inserted into the ground or into a stone mortise. When discovered, it lay on the ground, somehow broken into two fragments on one face and in four fragments on another. The pre-modern breakage has not been repaired yet. The stela is now kept in the storage room of Óc Eo Museum.1
The stela is inscribed on its two broad faces, face A in Sanskrit verse and face B in Old Khmer prose. Both faces are decorated with a blossoming lotus above one or two strings of pearls (two on A, only one on B) at the top of fourteen lines of text and one string of pearls below the text on each face. The Khmer text runs continuously in one column whereas the Sanskrit one is arranged in two columns, even-numbered verse quarters (pāda)s in one and odd-numbered ones in the other. Both texts are written in an early form of Khmer script typical of the second half of the seventh century, without long descenders on the characters ka and ra. Since no other king going by the name Jayavarman is known to have ruled in the seventh century, it is clear that the king Jayavarman mentioned in the Sanskrit text must have been Jayavarman I (657–681 CE). Besides its paleographic aspect, the inscription shares two main features of its content with other inscriptions of the same king: the opening expression ājñā vraḥ kamratāṅ añ ni “order of My Lord” (with addition of the particle ni where the inscriptions belonging to the reigns before and after use the phrase ājñā vraḥ kamratāṅ añ without said particle) and the details of the threat of punishment at the end of the Khmer portion.2
The character ra consists of a double stroke and does not extend farther down than the body of other characters. While the subscript of the character ṇa in the word pūrṇṇamī in the Khmer text and pūrṇṇodita- in the Sanskrit one still preserves the ‘‘x’’ shape (characteristic of the fifth and sixth centuries), the character ṇa above it has the two sides of the ‘x’ split and connected by a stroke at the bottom. The decoration of the stela and the paleographic characteristics of the script present similarities with several other inscriptions of Jayavarman I. The stela from Phum Chrei (K. 563, Kompong Speu, 7th century CE), for example, also has a decorative lotus at the top and a string of pearls below the text. The character ka does not have a long descendant loop, except the ones in the lines 9 and 12 of the Sanskrit text. The dominance of the ka without the descendant loop can also be found in the doorjamb from Tuol Kuk Preah (K. 493, Prey Veng, 657 CE); by contrast, the stela from Preah Kuhea Luong (K. 44, Kampot, 674 CE) presents more characters ka with the descendant loop than the other type, whereas the two types are equally represented in K. 563. The shapes of the vowel-markers markers i and ī. The first one is written as a round small circle and the latter is slightly larger with a horizontal stroke in the middle. In some cases, the vowel marker ī appears like a spiral turning to the left, which is comparable to that in the inscription K. 493.
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
(B4) Regarding the term saṁ paribhoga, the reproductions at our disposal make it imaginable that the dot we interpret as anusvāra is actually accidental, which would allow reading saparibhoga. Previous scholars have sometimes hesitated between saṁ paribhoga and saparibhoga (see e.g. the note in Cœdès 1936 on the inscription K. 6). But it is probably undesirable to read saparibhoga, as the expression is attested multiple times with or without p- prefix as psaṁ paribhoga, often with clear presence of anusvāra (see further occurrences in the inscriptions K. 51, K. 163, K. 426, K. 561, K. 582, K. 600, K. 818, K. 904, K. 926 and K. 1275).
(B6) Taṁrāṅ is a rare toponym. In a variant spelling (of presumably trivial significance), it appears, as Taṁraṅ in the inscription of Ban Hin Khon (Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand, 7th c.). Is Taṁrāṅ the Khmer form of the Sanskrit Tamandara[pura]? To give an example of the sometimes rather substantial differences between (presumably primary) vernacular names and their guise in Sanskrit context, we may first refer to the epigraphy of Campā, where Panrāṅ is the vernacular toponym to which Pāṇḍaraṅga (or Pāṇduraṅga) corresponds in other contexts (Griffiths and Southworth (2011, pp. 285–291)). We are also reminded of the possible correspondence between the Sanskrit name Kāmaraṅga for Arakan (in present-day Burma) and the Old Burmese toponyms Kaṁ Raṁ or Kamḥ Yaṁ ((2015, p. 307)). If Taṁraṁ does indeed form a pair with Tamandara, then the Malay or Cham explanation of the latter, proposed just above, may need to be reconsidered, or else it must be assumed that the vernacular Khmer term came into existence only after the Sanskritization of an originally Austronesian name had taken place.
(B6) Regarding ther term kloñ ñan, it might be read kloñña n(aṁ) “superintendent of temple (naṁ = vnaṁ)” but this would yield a unique example of the word vnaṁ followed by the preposition ai “at”. Nevertheless, there are several examples in the pre-Angkorian inscriptions where vnaṁ stands in front of a name.
(B7) The word cnaṁ is clearly the Old Khmer word meaning “year”, as found for instance in the inscription K. 90 (Kampong Cham, 6th c., lines N7–10) nivandha ge ta gui utsava ta pon hvat ta gui cnaṁ ta moyya “Provision for the people at the four festival occasions in one year”. The word cracar, by contrast, is not recorded in Pou’s Old Khmer dictionary (2004) while in Jenner’s dictionary of pre-Angkorian Khmer (2009, p. 144), based on a single attestation in the inscription K. 1004 (Kandal, 691 CE), it is analyzed as a derivation from the verb car “to write (note, jot) down in order”. However, in unpublished notes on that inscription, to which we have access, Jenner translates the word cracar tṅai “daily” (literally cracar “every” and tṅai “day”). If our intuition is correct that the context in which the word cracar appears in the inscription K. 1426 is comparable to the one where cracar tṅai appears in K. 1004, our translation of cracar cnaṁ as “every year” stands to reason. We would then propose a different morphological analysis from Jenner’s: cracar could be derived from the (otherwise unknown) Old Khmer antecedent of the word cuor word that means “line, row” in modern Khmer. With the prefix of intensification cra-, the resulting meaning could then be “one after another in a line or a row”, somewhat like the words “règle” and “régulier” in French which can refer both to straight lines and regularit3.
(B8) The word cmap is formed with the infix -m- whose original function seems to have been to create agent nouns, so c-m-ap “seizer” from cap “to seize” (2015, p. 307). However, it needs to be recognised that the inherited affixation of Khmer had already become fossilized to a certain degree by the stage of Old Khmer.4 In the context where cmap occurs in K. 1426, it is likely that the word functions as equivalent to the verb cap although the alternative interpretation as an agent noun cannot be entirely dismissed. The syntactic context is similar to that where c-m-er occurs, interchanging freely, it seems, with unaffixed cer “to transgress”, in the formulaic phrase of King Jayavarman I’s inscriptions: ge cer/cmer ājñā vraḥ kamratāṅ añ ge daṇḍa. This can be translated by “those who transgress the order of My Lord, are punished” if cmer is understood as a verb or “those who are transgressors of the order of My Lord, are punished” if it is taken as an agent noun.
(B10) Like the word cracar, cralak is formed with the prefix of intensification cra-, here attached to the verb -lak “to cut a notch, groove, make an incision; to hollow out; to trim, clip; to cut into; to scratch, score, groove, mark; to incise, engrave; to gouge, chisel”. The resulting meaning “to cut intensely” underlies our interpretation “to cause damage” in the context of the inscription ((2009, p. 417)). To date, the word cralak appears in three inscriptions, i.e. K. 502 (Chanthaburi, 7th c.; this inscription is fragmentary), K. 1267 (Kompong Speu, 7th c.) and K. 1426. The context in which the term cralak appears in K. 1267 seems to confirm our interpretation. The sentence ge ta cralak gui paṅ tiṅ ti mās kaddi moy can thus be translated as “Persons who cause damage [to the donation of the king] shall pay a fine of one kaṭṭi of gold” ((2001, p. 194)).
(B11) Analogously to the word cmap above, the noun k-n-ar is derived from the verb kar “to obstruct” with another affix, -n-, whose original function was likewise to form agent nouns, but contextually more likely to have been intended as a verb.
(B12) The expression qnak naṁ pitai “naṁ pitai people” cannot be entirely understood: while the meaning of qnak “person” is certain, that of the word pitai remains obscure and the word naṁ might be a noun meaning “cake” or a verb meaning “to lead, bring, take”. According to Jenner (2009, p. 310), pitai is the name of an unidentified cake (naṁ) which was presumably offered to the dead. However, if one considers naṁ to be a verb, then pitai must be its object and it may no longer be assumed to be any kind of cake. The expression qnak naṁ pitai figures also in another inscription of King Jayavarman I, i.e. the stela of Preah Kuhea Luong K. 44. The text alludes to the presence of some naṁ pitai people within the precincts of a sanctuary. Similarly, these people in K. 1426 probably had the privilege of entering the precincts of the Lord.
(B12) The restitution of the world dap is based on both the meaning and the space on the stone. Given that the prohibitive word dap is followed by the word pre or tel pre in three previous phrases, the same wording is expected in the lost passage here. Nevertheless, the available space is too large for the word pre and too small for tel pre. The meaning of dap suits the context better than that of pre “to use, to order”.