No. 1. Gaäha (Jasdan) pillar inscription. Mixed dialect.

1868 Bhau Daji, JBBRAS VIII, p. 234 f., and Plate; 1883 Hoernle, IA XII, p. 32 f.; 1890 note by Bh. Indraji, JRAS 1890, p. 652; 1895 PSIK, p. 22 f., No. 4, and Plate XVIII; 1896 note by Bh. Indraji, BG, Vol. I. Part I, p. 43; 1908 note by Rapson, CCAD, etc. p. LXII, No. 42; Luders list No 967; R. Banerji and V. S. Sukthankar-EI, XVI, No. 17.
Lu: - Records the erection of a ųatra by the brothers of the son of Pranāthaka, the grandson of Khara, of the Mānasa gîtra. The inscription gives the following pedigree: rājan mahākøatrapa bhadramukha svāmi-Chaøōana, his son rājan køatrapa svāmi-Jayadāman, his son rājan mahākøatrapa bha[dramukha] svāmi-Rudradāman, his son rājan mahākøatrapa bhadramukha svāmi-Rudrasčha (Rudrasiėha), his son rājan mahākøatrapa svāmi-Rudrasåna. There is some doubt about the last figure of the date of the year, which may be 6.
- Varøå 100 20 7 Bhādrapadabahulasa 5 . . . . rājãî mahākøatrapasya svāmi-Rudrasånasya.
(RB & VS)
The inscription was first edited, with a translation and lithograph, prepared probably from an eye-copy, in 1868, by Dr. Bhau Daji in JBBrRAS., Vol. VIII, pp. 234 f., and Plate. After that it remained unnoticed till 1883, when Hoernle published a revised transcript and translation of it in Ind. Ant., Vol. XII, pp. 32 f. The posthumous papers of Bhagvanlal Indraji, edited by Rapson in JRAS., 1890, p. 652, contain a short note on it. In 1885 the text and a translation, based upon the editio princeps of Dr. Bhau Daji, were republished in the Collection of Prakrit and Sanskrit Inscriptions, Bhavnagar, pp. 22 f., No. 4, and Plate XVIII. The Bombay Gazetteer, Vol. I, Part 1, p. 43, contains a very short note on it, originating from the pen of Bhagvanlal Indraji. Rapson's Catalogue of the coins of the Andhra Dynasty, etc. (p. lxii, No. 42), includes a short summary of its contents, and a reference to the literature of the subject, Prof. Luders in his List of Brāhmč Inscriptions (Appendix to Epigraphia Indica, Vol. X), No. 967, gives a complete biblography of the inscription, a reading of the date (it cannot be said whether from the published facsimiles or directly from an impression of the stone), and a summary of its contents. Prof. D. R. Bhandarkar refers to the inscription in Prog. Rep. Arch. Surv. of India, W. Circle, 1914-15, pp. 67-68, and suggests certain corrections.
The inscription is said to have been found at Gaähā, about two miles north of Jasdan, Kāōhiāvāä, engraved on a thick irregular slab standing upright on the margin of a lake. Subsequently the inscribed stone was transferred to the Watson Museum of Antiquities, Rajkot, where it is now exhibited.'

TEXT. (RB & VS)

1 [Va]røå 100 20 [7] [Bhā]drapada-bahulasa 5 [|*] R[ā]jãî mahakshat[r]apasa
2 bhadra-mukhasa svam[a]-Chāøtana-putra-papau[t]trasya rājãî Køa[tra*]pasa
3 svāmi-Jayad[a]ma-putra-pautrasya rājãî maha-Køatrapasya bhadra-mukhasya
4 [sva]ma-Rud[r]adāma-pau[tra]sya rājãî ma[ha]-Køa[tra*]pasya bhadra-mukhasya svā[m]i-
5 Rudrasčha[-putra*]sya rājãî maha-Køatrapasya svāmi-Rudrasånasya [|*] idam ųatraė
6 Mānasa-sa-gît[r]asya Pra[tā]ųaka-putrasya Khara[r]patthasya bhātrabhiõ utthavita[ė] sva[rga]
7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Remarks on the Transcript. (RB & VS)
______________________________________
From a set of estampages. Explanation of abbreviations:-D = Bhau Daji, JBBrRAS., Vol, VIII, pp. 234 f.; H=Hoernle, Ind. Ant., Vol. XII, pp. 32 f.; DRB = D. R. Bhandarkar, PRAS of India, W. Circle, 1914-15, pp. 67-8.
L. 1 The reading 7 is unceriain; it may be 6. DRB reads 5. L. 2. D and H -mukhasya svāmi-. The slanting line below the sa of the first word is an abrasion and not the subscript y. L. 3. D and H Jayadāma. bhadra-mukhasya is continued in a slanting direction above the level of the same line.
L. 4. No trace remains of the i in svāmi, if it was marked at all. L. 5. D and H mahā-. DRB Ųakri (for ųatraė), which is very doubtful.
L. 6. Hoernle's reading -māna[ė]tu Tuėgîtras[y]a is out of the question, and need not be discussed here. D pranāthtaka- (the previous syllable is read by him as Su-), and H Pratā[ra]thaka (for Pratāųaka), both of which are inadmissible. The second syllable may, perhaps, be nā; but the third one cannot be tha, as tha does not contain the vertical bar in the centre which our letter shows; the shallow stroke at the lower end of the letter is an accidental mark, of which the rock has many. D and H Khara-pautrasya, but the fourth syllable is clearly ttha and not tra; cf. the same ligature in a subsequent word of the same line. DRB Kharapčtthasya. D and H bhrātðbhiõ (for bhātrabhiõ). It is doubtful if the medial ð would be marked
differently from the subscript r by the writer of this inscription, DRB bhāttrabhiõ utthavitāsva and H utthavitāst[i]. The top of the fourth syllable is no doubt somewhat thick; nevertheless the sign of the length cannot be looked upon as having been marked. A part of our bracketed [rga] is lost in the crack and not distinguishable on the facsimile. DRB ends line 6 with utthavita sva-, and then gives an additional (seventh) line, [rggasukhartha], which we were not able to trace on the stone.