Critically examine the limitations of the inscriptional evidences in understanding political and economic history of India

Explanation

Ephigraphists face limitations of Inscriptional evidence in the following way:
(i) Technical limitations: Sometimes thc letters are very faintly engraved and thus, there is
uncertainty of reconstructions, inscriptions may be damaged or letters missing. It is not always easy to be sure about the exact meaning of the words used in inscriptions, some of which may be specific t parucular place or time. This has lead the scholars constantly debating and discussing alternative ways of reading inscription.
(ii) Problem of deciphering: Although several thousand inscriptions have been discovered, not all have been deciphered, published and translated. Besides many more inscriptions must have existed, which have not suryived the ravages of time. Therefore, what is available at present is probably only a fraction of what was inscribed.
(iii) Fundamental problem: is not everything that we may consider politically or economically significant was necessarily recorded in inscriptions. For example, routine agricultural practices and the joys and sorrows of daily existence find no mention in inscriptions, which focus morc often than not on nental problem grand, unique events. Besides the conrent of inscriptions almost invariably protects the perspective of the persons who commissioned them. Therefore, they need to be juxtaposed with other perspectives so as to arrive at a better understanding of the past.
Thus, epigraphy alone does not provide a full understanding of political and cconomic history for which historians often questioned both old and new evidence.