Indian Epigraphy: A Guide to the Study of Inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the Other Indo-Aryan Languages c7.s2.t6.13

c7.s2.t6.13

¹⁰¹ The character in question (𑀰) was read by Bühler (EI 2, 324) as *ṣa* because of its paleographic similarity to standard *ṣa*, but Lüders (*Philologica Indica*, 213–29) provided cogent linguistic arguments (213–7) for reading it as *sa*. Although most modern scholars have followed Bühler, Lüders’ reading seems to be preferable. (Note that the relation and distinction between *sa* and *ṣa* in early Brāhmī are often problematic; see 2.2.4 and 3.1.2.1 n. 5.) It is worth noting that although Bühler’s edition of the Bhaṭṭiprōḷu inscriptions is the one which is usually referred to and followed in subsequent publications, Lüders’ readings and interpretations are very different from and much superior to Bühler’s, and thus should be adopted as the standard.