Notes on the Aśokan rock edicts

Abstract

7.1 Consideration of the various mistakes and methods of expression enable us to conclude that the chain of transmission of the rock edicts usually took the following form. 7.2 (a) The king's commands were dictated by someone whose pronunciation showed some Māgadhan peculiarities (e.g. d for t25) to one or more clerks. They wrote down in Brāhmī what they heard, correcting any mispronunciations, which they presumably regarded as vulgarisms, except where the phrase was ambiguous (e.g. hita-/hida-) or the meaning unknown to them (e.g. supadālaya-). Mistakes were made (e.g. n written for y), and when there was more than one scribe differences began to arise (e.g. e ca opposed to e vā pi in RE II(A)). (b) As many copies as were required for the regions were made from the original(s). It seems clear from the close similarity between the versions at Dh and J that they both used the same copy, and Sh and M sometimes had only one copy between them (as shown by ada and dha\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{m} \)ma\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{m} \)gala-), but generally there was no consistency in the arrangement of which regional copy was made from which original. So we find that in RE II G Dh J follow the version with e vā pi, but in RE V G Sh follow the version with sukaraā and aparigodhāye. Besides the mistakes wchich inevitably crept into individual regional copies at this stage (e.g. āyatāye for āyatiye, putatāle for putanatāle), some dialect changes were also introduced (e.g. eta written for esa in RE VI(J) in the version sent to Sh, which the local scribe later changed to etra). (c) The versions intended for Sh and M were transliterated into Kharo\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{s} \)\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{t} \)hī. (d) Translation into the local dialect was carried out in the various regions, to the best of the clerk's or scribe's ability.26 In some cases, at least, the translation seems to have been made as the carving was in progress. So in RE VII(E) the scribe at G copied from his original dasa\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{n} \)e ca dāne ca...dasa\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{n} \)e ca, presumably taking these forms as locatives. Reading on to the end of the sentence he found dha\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{m} \)mānusathi ca dha\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{m} \)mapalipuchā, and realised that the preceding words too were nominatives. He accordingly continued hira\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{m} \)\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{n} \)apa\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{t} \)ividhāno ca jānapadasa ... darsana\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{m} \), but did not correct what he had already inscribed. If the translation had been made before the carving was begun, there seems to be no good reason for such half-corrected misinterpretations, which are numerous. That the edicts as we have them are sometimes eye-copies is shown by the typical copying errors which are found (e.g. in RE XIV(E) Y sa\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{m} \)khāsa\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{m} \)khāyāya for sa\(\underset{\raise0.3em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\cdot}$}}{m} \)khāye). That the version was sometimes dictated to the scribe by a clerk is shown by mistakes which seem more likely to be aural than visual (i.g. K dose and putadāle in RE VI, and the phonological variations and changes in word order in the two versions of RE VI(E) and (F) at Sh). 7.3 The king's original orders were, therefore, inscribed as they had been misheard, miscopied, and misinterpreted, to a greater or less extent, by the various members of the secretariate. It must be our aim to remove the faults which have crept in (of which the examples given above are only a small selection), and try to find out exactly what A\s'oka said.