365bet娱乐

216
啶�啷佮ぐ啶距ぃ啶�啷� - [pur膩峁嘺m - ] 笔鲍搁膧狈础
[Vol. VI, No. 1
2. In Dr. Agrawala's opinion, the discovery of the Aramaic
version of the Kandahar Rock Edict of A艣oka does not help us
in locating the land of the Kambojas, because two Aramaic ins-
criptions were discovered at Taxila and Laghman. He further
observes that the Aramaic Edict of A艣oka at Kandahar does
not prove the existence of an Aramaic-knowing colony in that
area during the age in question and says, "Kharo峁ａ弓hi, Aramaic
and Greek were the three scripts selected for the north-western
province of A艣okan empire, and no good reason can be pointed out
why a particular script was chosen for a particular place." It is,
however, a matter of regret that I do not agree with any of these
points raised by Dr. Agrawala.
In the first place, the Aramaic Edict of Asoka at Kandahar
is an official record engraved on rock, so that it was undoubtedly
meant for the Aramaic-knowing people of the area just as the
Greek version of the Edict certainly points to the existence of
Greek-knowing subjects of A艣oka in the same region. If such
was not the case, the very purpose for which A艣oka is known to
have issued his Edicts would have been defeated. In the Edicts,
the Maurya emperor very often clearly states the reasons why
he engraved his rescripts on Dharma on rocks, and it is well
known that one of these reasons was to make his views known
to his officers and subjects who, as well as those who would read
them in future, were expected to follow his instructions.
Secondly, the fragmentary Aramaic inscriptions from Taxila
and Laghman are not definitely known to have been official
records engraved on rock, while the Shahbazgarhi (Peshawar
District) and Mansehra (Hazara District) Edicts in the Kharosth墨
script and Prakrit language would suggest that, even if there
were settlements of Aramaic-knowing people in the area, the
majority of A艣oka's subjects in these parts, for whom the Edicts
were meant, were used to Kharosthi and Prakrit and not to Greek
and Aramaic. What I said is that there could have been persons
knowing Greek and Aramaic outside the Kandaharegion, but
that the concentration of such people in A艣oka's empire was in
Jan., 1964]
KAMBOJA
217 the area where his Greek and Aramaic Edicts engraved on rock
have been discovered.
Thirdly, the reason why particular languages and scripts
were chosen by A艣oka for his Edicts meant for different parts of
his empire is quite obvious. The emperor wanted that his Edicts
should be intelligible to the majority of the local people.
in
3. Dr. Agrawala says, "The Yavanas in Indian history
are found in two regions, namely, at first in Bactria and secondly
Gandhara and Punjab...... The yavanas in Bactria were
remembered as B盲hlika-yavanas as mentioned in the Brahma峁囜笉a
Purana... in a list of horses from that country (n:).
This was the situation in the post-Alexandrian period during the
period from Candragupta to A艣oka. Therefore, it were the
B盲hlika-yavanas, to whom A艣oka was referring...... The country
of the Bahlika-yavanas, i.e. Bactrian Greeks, being Balkh on the
south of the Oxus, Kamboja mentioned along with the yavanas
could very well have been in the region of the Pamir." I am
sorry that none of these statements seems to be acceptable.
Firstly, the statment regarding yavana rule only in Bahlika,
Gandhara and the Punjab is wrong since certain yavana kings
(e.g. Hermains) are known to have ruled outside those territories.
Secondly, I do not find any reference to the B盲blika-yavanas
or Bactrian Greeks in the expression Bahlika-yavan-odbh奴t膩岣� which
in my opinion, means 'born in the B盲hlika and y膩vana lands
(i. e. the lands of the B盲hl墨kas and Yavanas).'
Thirdly, even if we accept that the Brahmanda Purana
mentions the Bactrian Greeks, it is quite impossible to assign the
reference to 'the period from Candragupta to A艣oka' for the
simple reason that Bactria, as is well known, never formed a
part of the Maurya empire. It was at first a province of the
Selucid empire and was ruled by the Greek governors of the
Selucids. About the middle of the third century B. C., when
A艣oka was on the Maurya throne, Divodotus I, governor of
Bactria, threw off the Seleucid yoke and, from that time, it
28