History · Ch 2 — Kings, Farmers and Towns — Early States and Economies
Back to Basics
Back to Basics
Understanding Inscriptions: How Historians Read the Past
Inscriptions are one of the most important sources for reconstructing early Indian history. But how do historians actually read them? The process of deciphering ancient scripts took decades of painstaking work by European scholars and Indian pandits working together.
Deciphering Brahmi
Most scripts used to write modern Indian languages are derived from Brahmi, the script used in most Asokan inscriptions. From the late eighteenth century, European scholars, aided by Indian pandits, worked backwards from contemporary Bengali and Devanagari manuscripts. They compared the letters of these modern scripts with older specimens found on inscriptions.
A key mistake early scholars made: they often assumed the earliest inscriptions were in Sanskrit. In fact, the earliest inscriptions were written in Prakrit, a language closer to everyday speech. It was only after decades of careful investigation by several epigraphists that James Prinsep successfully deciphered Asokan Brahmi in 1838.
The Brahmi script is the ancestor of nearly all modern Indian scripts. The Asokan edicts — the earliest substantial body of inscriptions in India — were written in this script.
How Kharosthi Was Read
The story of deciphering Kharosthi, the script used in inscriptions from the northwest of the subcontinent, followed a different path. Here, the discovery of coins of Indo-Greek kings (who ruled the region around the second-first centuries BCE) proved crucial.
These coins carried the names of kings written in two scripts: Greek and Kharosthi. European scholars who could already read Greek compared the letters. For example, the symbol for the sound "a" could be identified in both scripts when writing names such as Apollodotus. Once James Prinsep identified the language of Kharosthi inscriptions as Prakrit, it became possible to read longer inscriptions as well.
Historical Evidence from Inscriptions: A Closer Look
To understand how epigraphists and historians actually work, let us examine two Asokan inscriptions more carefully.
What the inscriptions reveal about the ruler's identity
Notice that the name "Asoka" does not appear in the inscription (Source 10 in the textbook). Instead, the ruler uses two titles:
- Devanampiya — often translated as "beloved of the gods"
- Piyadassi — meaning "pleasant to behold"
The name Asoka does appear in some other inscriptions, which also contain these same titles. By examining all these inscriptions together and finding that they match in content, style, language, and palaeography (the study of ancient handwriting), epigraphists have concluded that they were all issued by the same ruler.
Assessing the truth of statements
Asoka claims that earlier rulers had no arrangements to receive reports. Historians must constantly assess such statements — are they true, plausible, or exaggerations? If you consider the political history of the subcontinent before Asoka, you might question whether this claim is entirely accurate.
How epigraphists clarify meaning
You may have noticed words within brackets in the inscription. Epigraphists sometimes add these to make the meaning of sentences clear. This must be done very carefully, to ensure the intended meaning of the original author is not changed.
The king's orders (from Source 10)
The inscription records the king's words: "Thus speaks king Devanampiya Piyadassi: In the past, there were no arrangements for disposing affairs, nor for receiving regular reports. But I have made the following arrangement. Pativedakas should report to me about the affairs of the people at all times, anywhere, whether I am eating, in the inner apartment, in the bedroom, in the cow pen, being carried (possibly in a palanquin), or in the garden. And I will dispose of the affairs of the people everywhere."
Epigraphists have translated the term pativedaka as "reporter." Think about how the functions of a pativedaka would have been different from what we generally associate with reporters today. The pativedaka was a royal official reporting to the king, not a journalist reporting to the public.
The Limits of Inscriptions: Questions Historians Must Ask
Historians cannot simply take inscriptions at face value. They must ask difficult questions:
- If a king's orders were inscribed on natural rocks near cities or important routes, would passers-by have stopped to read them? Most people were probably not literate.
- Did everybody throughout the subcontinent understand the Prakrit used in Pataliputra (the Mauryan capital)?
- Would the orders of the king have actually been followed?
Answers to such questions are not always easy to find.
A deeper puzzle: the missing inscription …