Epigraphical Notes
Summary
In this note the author responds to Dr. K. C. Panigrahi’s re‑edition of the Bhadarak inscription of Gāṇa. Panigrahi questioned the author’s earlier reading, arguing that inscriptions recording image donations with mūla‑japa are implausible and that the lack of land specifications and donor’s name renders the record dubious. The author counters that such donations are not rare and that land gifts often omit detailed descriptions. He explains that omitting the donor’s name is common in votive inscriptions and suggests that Panigrahi misunderstood the epigraphic conventions. The note clarifies the correct interpretation of the inscription and emphasises the importance of contextual knowledge in epigraphy.
AI-assisted summary, not yet checked. Consult the original PDF before citing.
Conclusion
By addressing a colleague’s criticisms, the author defends his reading of the Bhadarak inscription and highlights how epigraphical interpretation depends on understanding contemporary conventions. The note underscores the need for careful analysis before proposing radical reinterpretations of inscriptions.