Kalaikuri-Sultanpur Plate of the Time of Kumāragupta I

Editors: Dániel Balogh, Amandine Wattelier-Bricout, Arlo Griffiths.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00033.

Language: Sanskrit.

Repository: Bengal Copper Plates (tfb-bengalcharters-epigraphy).

Version: (3b1ee6e), last modified (32b4399).

Edition

⟨Page 1r⟩ ⟨1⟩ svasti⟨.⟩ śr̥ṅgavera-vaitheya-pūrṇṇak¿o?⟨au⟩śikāyāḥ Āyuktakācyutadāso ’dhikaraṇañ ca hastiśīrṣe (vibhītak)y(āṁ gulmagandhi)⟨2⟩kāyāṁ dhānyapāṭalikāyāṁ saṁgohāl¿i?ṣu brāhmaṇādīn grāma-k(u)ṭumbina(ḥ k)uśalam anuvarṇya bodhayanti⟨.⟩

(vi)ditam bo ⟨3⟩ bhaviṣyati yathā Iha-vīthī-kulika-bhīma-kāyastha-prabhucandra-rudradāsa-devadatta-lakṣmmaṇa-k[āntide]va-śambhudatta-kr̥ṣṇa⟨4⟩dāsa-pustapāla-si¿ṅ?hanandi-yaśodāmabhiḥ vīthī-mahattara-kumāradeva-gaṇḍa-prajāpati-Umayaśa-rāmaśarmma-jyeṣ(ṭha)⟨5⟩dāma-svāmicandra-harisi¿ṅ?ha-kuṭumbi-yaśoviṣṇu-kumāraviṣṇu-kumārabhava-kumārabhūti-kumāra-ya(śagu)pta-vailinaka- ⟨6⟩ śivakuṇḍa-vasuśivāparaśiva-dāmarudra-prabhamitra-kr̥ṣṇamitra-maghaśarmma-īśvaracandra-rudra-bhavasvāmi(deva) ⟨7⟩ śrīnātha-hariśarmma-guptaśarmma-suśarmma-hari-Alātasvāmi-brahmasvāmi-mahāsenabhaṭṭa-ṣaṣṭhirā[ta]-gu[5×][śa]⟨8⟩rmma-Uṇṭaśarmma-kr̥ṣṇadatta-nandadāma-bhavadatta-Ahiśarmma-somaviṣṇu-lakṣmmaṇaśar(mma)-kānti-dhovvoka-kṣemaśar(mma)-śu⟨9⟩kkraśarmma-sarp(pa)pālita-kaṅkuṭi-viśvaśaṅkara-jayasvāmi-kaivarttaśarmma-himaśarmma-purandara-jayaviṣṇu-Uma [ca. 1×] ⟨10⟩ si¿ṅ?hatta-bonda-nārāya¿n?⟨ṇ⟩adāsa-vīranāga-rājyanāga-guhamahi-bhavanātha-guhaviṣṇu-śarvva--yaśoviṣṇu-ṭakkakuladāma[…]va- ⟨11⟩ śrīguhaviṣṇu-rāmasvāmi-kāmanakuṇḍa-ratibhadra-Acyutabhadra-loḍhaka-prabhakīrtti-jayada(tta?)-kāluka-Acyuta-naradeva-bhava ⟨12⟩ -bha(va)rakṣita-piccakuṇḍa-pravarakuṇḍa-śarvvadāsa-gopāla-purog(ā)ḥ vayaṁ ca vijñāpitāḥ⟨.⟩

Iha vīthyām apratikara-khila-kṣettra⟨13⟩sya śaśvat-kālopabhogāyākṣaya-nīvyā dvi-dīnārikya-khila-kṣettra-kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpa-vikraya-maryādayā Icchemahi prati ⟨14⟩ prati mātā-pitroḥ puṇyābhivr̥ddhaye pauṇḍravarddhanaka-cāturvvidya-vāj¿i?saneya-caraṇābhyantara-brāhmaṇa-deva⟨15⟩bhaṭṭa-Amaradatta-mahāsenadattānāṁ pañca-mahāyajña-pravarttanāya nava-kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpān krītvā dātuṁ⟨.⟩ Ebhir evopa⟨16⟩ri-nirddiṣṭaka-grāmeṣu khila-kṣettrāṇi vidyante tad arhathāsmattaḥ Aṣṭādaśa-dīnārān gr̥hīt[v]ā Etān nava-kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩[āpā]⟨Page 1v⟩⟨17⟩n{y} anumodayituṁ

yataḥ Eṣā(ṁ) kulika-bhīmādīnāṁ vijñāpyam upalabhya pustapāla-si¿ṅ?hanandi-yaśo[dāmnoś cā]⟨18⟩vadhāraṇayāvadhr̥t¿ā?⟨o ’⟩sty ayam iha-vīthyām apratikara-khila-kṣettrasya śaśvat-kālopabhogāyākṣayanīvyā dvi-dī(nā)⟨19⟩rikya-kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpa-vikkrayo ’nuvr̥ttas tad dīyatāṁ nāsti vi{ḥ}rodhaḥ kaścid⟨.⟩ ity avasthāpya kulika-bhīmādibhyo Aṣṭāda(śa) ⟨20⟩ dīnārān upasa¿ṅ?haritakān āyīkr̥tya hastiśīrṣa-vibhītakyāṁ dhānyapāṭalikā-(gu)[lma](ga)ndhikā-grāmeṣu khanī[2×]⟨21⟩dyāṁ dakṣiṇoddeśeṣu Aṣṭau kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpāḥ dhānyapāṭalik¿a?⟨ā⟩-grāmasya paścimottaroddeśe(ṣv ā)dyakhāta-parikhā-veṣṭi(ta)⟨22⟩¿m?-uttar(e)ṇa vāṭā-nadī paścimena gulmagandhikā-grāma-¿sīmānam? iti kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpa⟨⟨m⟩⟩ eko gulm¿ā?gandhikāyāṁ pūrvv(e)⟨23⟩ṇādyapathaḥ paścima-pradeśe droṇa-¿b?⟨v⟩āpa-dvayaṁ hastiśīrṣa-prāveśya-tāpasa[potta]ke dayitāpottake ca vi⟨24⟩bhītak¿a?⟨ī⟩-prāveśya-citravātaṅgare c¿ā?⟨ai⟩va kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpāḥ sapta droṇa-¿b?⟨v⟩āpāḥ ṣaṬ Eṣu yathopari-nirddiṣṭaka-grāma-pra⟨25⟩deśeṣv eṣāṁ kulika-bhīma-kāyastha-prabhucandra-rudradāsādīnāṁ mātā-pitroḥ puṇyābhivr̥ddhaye brā(hmaṇa) ⟨26⟩ devabhaṭṭasya kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpāḥ pañca ku 5 Amaradattasya kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpa-dvayaṁ mahāsenadattasya kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩ā(pa-dvayaṁ) ⟨27⟩ ku 2 Eṣāṁ trayāṇām pañca-mahāyajña-pravarttanāya nava-kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpāni pradattāni

tad yuṣmākaṁ [3×] (ni?)(vedya)⟨28⟩ti likhyate ca⟨.⟩ samupasthita-kāla[ṁ] ye ’py a(n)ye viṣayapatayaḥ Āyuktakāḥ kuṭumbino ’dhikaraṇikā vā sam(bya)va⟨29⟩hāriṇo bhaviṣyanti tair api bhūmi-dāna-phalam avekṣya Akṣaya-nīvy anupālanīyā⟨.⟩ Uktañ ca mahābhārate bhagava⟨30⟩tā vyāsena

I. Anuṣṭubh

sva-dattāṁ para-dattām ¿b?⟨v⟩ā

a

yo hare⟨ta⟩ vasundharāṁ

b

sa viṣṭhāyāṁ k¿ri?mir bhūtvā

c

pi(tr̥)bhiḥ saha pacyat¿ai?⟨e⟩

d
II. Anuṣṭubh

ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣa-sahasrāṇi

a

⟨31⟩ svargge vasati bhūmidaḥ

b

Ākṣeptā cānuma(ntā ca)

c

tāny eva narake vaseT

d
III. Anuṣṭubh

kr̥śāya kr̥śa-(vr̥ttā)ya

a

vr̥tti-kṣīṇāya sīda(te)

b

(bhūmiṁ) ⟨32⟩ vr̥ttikarī¿n? da¿tv?ā

c

sukhī bhavati kāmada⟨ḥ⟩

d
IV. Anuṣṭubh

bahubhi(r vasudhā) bhuktā

a

bhujyate ca punaḥ punaḥ

b

yasya yasya yadā bhūmi(s)

c

(ta)sya tasya ⟨33⟩ tadā phalaṁ

d
V. Anuṣṭubh

pūrvva-dattāṁ dvijātibhyo

a

yatnād rakṣ{y}a yudhiṣṭhira

b

mahīm mah¿i?⟨ī⟩matāṁ śreṣṭha

c

dānāc chreyo ’nu(pālanam)

d

(iti)⟨.⟩ ⟨34⟩ saMvvaT 100 20 1 vaiśākha di 1

Apparatus

⟨1⟩ k¿o?⟨au⟩śikāyāḥ ⬦ k(au)ś(i)kāyāḥ DCS NBS; k(au)ś(i)k(ā)yāḥ DB • Sircar 1943 notes that the reading may be -kośikāyāḥ. The place name pūrṇṇakośikā is regularised in Pūrṇakauśikā in the translation but it is found with the same spelling and with the same location in the territory of Śr̥ṅgavera in the Jagadispur Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I line 1. — ⟨1⟩ Āyuktakācyutadāso ’dhikaraṇañ ca ⬦ Āyuktakā(cyutadāso ’dhika)raṇaś ca DCS; Āyuktak[o]cyutadāso ’dhikaraṇañ ca NBS; Āyuktakā(cyuta)dās(o) ’dh[i]kara(ṇañ ca) DB. — ⟨1⟩ hastiśīrṣe (vibhītak)y(āṁ gulmagandhi)⟨2⟩kāyāṁ ⬦ hastiśīrṣa(vibhītakyāṁ gulmagandhi)kāyāṁ DCS; hastiśīrṣe (vibhītak)y(āṁ gulmagandhi)kāyāṁ NBS; (ha)stiśīrṣe (vibhītak)y(āṁ gulmagandhi)kā(yā)ṁ DB • The last four akṣaras of line 1 are almost unreadable, but their reading can be ascertained from parallel passages in lines 20 and 22.

⟨2⟩ dhānyapāṭalikāyāṁ DCS NBS ⬦ (dhā)nyapāṭalikāyāṁ DB. — ⟨2⟩ sagohāl¿i?ṣu NBS ⬦ saṁgohāliṣu DCS; sa(ṁ)gohāl¿i?ṣu DB. — ⟨2⟩ -k(u)ṭumbina(ḥ k)uśalam ⬦ -kuṭumbi(naḥ kuśa)lam DCS; -kuṭumbi[naḥ k]uśalam NBS; kuṭumbi(naḥ k)uśalam DB. — ⟨2⟩ bodhayanti DCS ⬦ bodhyanti NBS; bo(dhayant)i DB • Sircar 1943 suggests reading bodhayati in the note 1b. In my view, no emendation is necessary.

⟨3⟩ bhaviṣyati • Sircar 1943 proposes to emend this to bhavatu. But use of future forms in the meaning of imperative is found throughout the corpus, notably in Mahatī-Raktamālā I. — ⟨3⟩ -lakṣmmaṇa- ⬦ -lakṣmaṇa- DCS NBS DB. — ⟨3⟩ -k[āntide]va-vaśambhudatta- ⬦ -kā[2×][vinayada]vatta- DCS; -kā(ntide)va-śambhudatta NBS; -kā(ntide)va-vaśambhudatta- DB.

⟨4⟩ si¿ṅ?hanandi DCS ⬦ -si(ṁha)nandi- NBS; -si¿(ṅha)?nandi- DB. — ⟨4⟩ -Umayaśa-rā° ⬦ -Umaya(śo)-rā° DCS; -Umaya¿(śa)?⟨śo⟩-rā° NBS; -Uma(yaśa-rā)° DB • Since the name Umayaśa appears again in precisely the same spelling in Jagadishpur, line 4, it seems better not to emend here. — ⟨4⟩ -jyeṣ(ṭha)° ⬦ -jyeṣṭha° DCS NBS; -jyeṣṭha° DB.

⟨5⟩ -ya(śagu)pta-vailinaka- ⬦ ya[śa][1×]sta-vailina(ka) DCS; ya[śogu]pta-vailina[ndi] NBS; ya(śogu?)pta-vailina(ka?) DB • Sircar 1943 suggests the alternative reading -khilinaka- instead of -vailinaka-.

⟨6⟩ -bhavasvāmi(deva)- ⬦ -bhava[4×] DCS; -bhavanā[tha][2×]- NBS; -bhava(svā)(mideva?)- DB • Sanyal 1955–1956 adds in a note : “the reading seems to be Rudrabhava-svāmi[deva]. -Ed.”.

⟨7⟩ bhaṭṭa-ṣaṣṭhirā[ta]-gu[5×][śa] ⬦ bhaṭṭa-svāmya[3×](rū)paśa DCS; bhaṭṭa-ṣaṣṭhirā[ma]-gu[4×](śa) NBS; bhaṭṭa-(ṣaṣṭhirā)(ma)-(gu)[4×](śa) DB.

⟨8⟩ somaviṣṇu- DCS NBS ⬦ s(o)maviṣṇu- DB. — ⟨8⟩ -lakṣmmaṇa- ⬦ -lakṣmmaṇa- DCS NBS DB. — ⟨8⟩ śar(mma)-kānti-dhovvoka-kṣemaśar(mma)- ⬦ śarmma-kīrttiviṣṇu-kramaśarmma- DCS; śar[mma]-[…]-dhaivvaka-kṣemaśarmma- NBS; śa(r)(mma)-(kānti-dho?)vv(oka)-kṣemaśarmma- DB.

⟨9⟩ -sarp(pa)pālita- ⬦ -sarppapālita- DCS; -sa[rppa]pālita- NBS; -sarp(p)apālita- DB. — ⟨9⟩ purandara-jayaviṣṇu-Uma° ⬦ purandara-jayaviṣṇu-[4×] DCS; pu[ra]ndara-[ja]yaviṣṇu-Uma° NBS; (p)u(ran)da(ra-ja)yaviṣṇu-(uma?) DB.

⟨10⟩ si¿ṅ?hatta- DCS NBS DB • Sircar 1943 and Sanyal 1955–1956 both emend siṁhadatta. — ⟨10⟩ -yaśoviṣṇu-ṭakkakuladāma[…]va- ⬦ -viṣṇuvi[3×]kuladāma[2×]- DCS; -ya[śo]viṣṇuṭaṅkakuladāma[…]va- NBS; =ya(śo?)vi(ṣṇu-taṅ)ka-kuladāma [ca. 2×] DB.

⟨11⟩ -śrīguhaviṣṇu- DCS NBS ⬦ -śrīgu(ha)viṣṇu- DB. — ⟨11⟩ -kāmanakuṇḍa- DCS NBS ⬦ -kā(ma)nakuṇḍa- DB. — ⟨11⟩ -prabhakīrtti- DCS DB ⬦ -prabhukīrtti- NBS. — ⟨11⟩ -jayadatta-kāluka-Acyuta- ⬦ -jayadatta-kālaka-Acyuta- DCS; jayada[ra]-kā[…] Acyuta NBS; jayada(tta?)-(ko)bha(ka?)- DB • Sircar 1943 suggests reading kālācyuta — ⟨11⟩ -loḍhaka- NBS DB ⬦ -līḍhaka- DCS.

⟨12⟩ -bha(va)rakṣita- ⬦ -bhavarakṣita- DCS NBS DB. — ⟨12⟩ -purog(ā)ḥ ⬦ -purogāḥ DCS NBS DB. — ⟨12⟩ khila-kṣettra ⬦ khila-kṣetra DCS NBS DB.

⟨13⟩ -kṣettra-kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpa- ⬦ kṣetra-kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpa- DCS NBS; kṣetra-kulya-bāpa DB. — ⟨13⟩ Icchemahi • Sircar 1943 suggests reading icchāmaḥ. Indeed the use of an optative with the verb iṣ- seems quite redundant, but as the form is correct, I suggest seeing the redundant use as intentional and translating it by using an intensity adverb. See translation part

⟨14⟩ -cāturvvidya- DCS ⬦ -cāturvvedya- NBS DB.

⟨15⟩ °¿b?⟨v⟩āpān krītvā DCS NBS ⬦ °bāpā(n kr)ītvā DB. — ⟨15⟩ evopa DCS NBS ⬦ evo(pa) DB.

⟨16⟩ khila-kṣettrāṇi DCS ⬦ khila-kṣetrāṇi NBS DB. — ⟨16⟩ nava-kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩[āpā]⟨Page 1v⟩⟨17⟩ny ⬦ nava-kulya-bā[pā]n{y} DCS; nava-kulya-b(ā)[pā]ny NBS; nava-kulya-b(ā)[pā] DB • Sanyal 1955–1956 already suggests the emendation navakulyavāpān.

⟨17⟩ anumodayituṁ ⬦ anu[po]dayituṁ DCS; anumoday[i]tu[ṁ] NBS; anumoday(i)tu(ṁ) DB. — ⟨17⟩ bhīmādīnāṁ DCS NBS ⬦ bhīm-ād(ī)nāṁ DB.

⟨18⟩ dhāraṇayāvadhr̥t¿ā?⟨o ’⟩sty DCS ⬦ dhāraṇayāvadhr̥to ’sty NBS DB. — ⟨18⟩ -dvi-dī(nā)° ⬦ -dvi-dīnā° DCS NBS; -dvi-dī(nā)° DB.

⟨19⟩ vi{ḥ}rodhaḥ ⬦ virodhaḥ DCS NBS DB. — ⟨19⟩ °dibhyo Aṣṭāda(śa) ⬦ °di[bhyo Aṣṭādaśa] DCS; °dibhyo Aṣṭādaśa NBS DB.

⟨20⟩ upasa¿ṅ?haritakān • Emend upasaṁhr̥takān or upasaṁhāritakān? Sircar 1943, p. 22, note 23, already emends upasaṁhr̥takān. — ⟨20⟩ °kā-(gu)[lma](ga)ndhikā- ⬦ °kā[yā saṁgohālika]- DCS; °kā-[gulma]gandhikā- NBS; kā-(gu)(lma)(ga)ndhikā DB. — ⟨20⟩ -grāmeṣu khanī[2×]⟨21⟩dyāṁ ⬦ -grāmeṣu[4×]⟨21⟩dyāṁ DCS NBS; -grāmeṣu (v)i(bh)ī(ta?)[1×]⟨21⟩dyāṁ DB.

⟨21⟩ dhānyapāṭalik¿a?⟨ā⟩-grāmasya ⬦ dhānyapāṭalika-grāmasya DCS; dhānyapāṭalikā-grāmasya NBS DB • According to its earlier mention in line 20, one could emend dhānyapāṭalikā. — ⟨21⟩ °(ṣv ā)dyakhāta- ⬦ °[sadyaḥ khāta]- DCS; [ā]dyakhāta- NBS; [1×] dy(o) [1×] (ta)- DB. — ⟨21⟩ -veṣṭi(ta)⟨22⟩¿m?-uttar(e)ṇa DCS NBS DB • Read -veṣṭita uttareṇa, already suggested by Sircar 1943. — ⟨21⟩ parikhā-veṣṭita DCS NBS ⬦ (pa)rikhā-veṣṭi(ta) DB.

⟨22⟩ -uttareṇa DCS NBS ⬦ -uttar(e)ṇa DB. — ⟨22⟩ kulya-¿b?⟨v⟩āpa⟨⟨m⟩⟩ eko° ⬦ kulya-bāpa [e]ko° DCS; kulya-bāpameko° NBS; kulya-bāpa(m eko) DB • Emend kulya-vāpa eko. — ⟨22⟩ pūrvve DCS NBS ⬦ pūrvv(e) DB.

⟨23⟩ vi⟨24⟩bhītak¿a?⟨ī⟩- • I assume vibhītaka- is a scribal error for vibhītakī: Indeed this village name is twice spelled vibhītakī in lines 1 and 20.

⟨24⟩ c¿ā?⟨ai⟩va ⬦ [ca] DCS; yāva⟨t⟩ NBS; (yāva)⟨t⟩ DB • Emend caiva ? — ⟨24⟩ ṣaṬ Eṣu ⬦ ṣaṭ⟨.⟩ eṣu DCS; ṣaṭeṣu NBS; ṣat eṣu DB.

⟨25⟩ brāhmaṇa DCS NBS ⬦ brā(hmaṇa) DB.

⟨28⟩ -kāla[ṁ] ye ’py a(n)ye ⬦ kāla [yepyanye] DCS; -kālam-apy-anye NBS; -kāla(m a)py anye DB. — ⟨28⟩ sam(bya)va ⬦ [sambyava] DCS; ¿sambya?⟨saṁvya⟩va NBS; sambyava DB.

⟨29⟩ mahābhārate DCS NBS ⬦ mahā(bhā)ra(te) DB.

⟨30⟩ ¿b?⟨v⟩ā DCS NBS ⬦ NBS DB. — ⟨30⟩ pi(tr̥)bhiḥ ⬦ [pitr̥bhiḥ] DCS; pi(tr̥bhiḥ) NBS; pi(tr̥bhiḥ) DB. — ⟨30⟩ pacyat¿ai?⟨e⟩ ⬦ [pacyate] DCS; pa[cyate] NBS; pa(cyate) DB. — ⟨30⟩ ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣasahasrāṇi ⬦ [ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣasahasrāṇi] DCS; ṣaṣṭi{ṁ} varṣasahasrā[ṇi] NBS; (ṣa)(ṣṭiṁ varṣa-sahasrā)(ṇi) DB.

⟨31⟩ cānuma(ntā ca) ⬦ cānumantā [ca] DCS; cānuma[ntā] ca NBS; cānuma(ntā) ca DB. — ⟨31⟩ -(vr̥ttā)ya ⬦ -[vr̥ttāye] DCS; -vr̥ttāya NBS; -vr̥ttāya DB.

⟨32⟩ sukhī ⬦ [sukhī] DCS; s[ukh]ī NBS; s(ukh)ī DB. — ⟨32⟩ punaḥ punaḥ DCS ⬦ punaḥ puna⟨ḥ⟩ NBS DB. — ⟨32⟩ bhūmi(s ta)sya tasya ⬦ [bhūmis tasya tasya] DCS; bhūmis [tasya ta]sya NBS; bhū(mis)(tasya) (tasya) DB.

⟨33⟩ tadā DCS NBS ⬦ ta(dā) DB. — ⟨33⟩ rakṣ{y}a DCS NBS DB • Read rakṣa, as one can read in Raktamālā #1, line 24, Baigram Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I, line 24, A grant of land in the Tāvīra district, line 20, Paharpur Charter of the Time of Budhagupta, line 24 and Raktamālā #2, lines 23-24. — ⟨33⟩ yudhiṣṭhira DCS NBS ⬦ (yu)(dhi)ṣṭhira DB. — ⟨33⟩ dānāc chreyo ’nu(pālanam) DCS ⬦ dānāc chreyo ’nupā[la]nam NBS; dānā(c chreyo nu)(pāla)(na)(m?) DB. — ⟨33⟩ (iti) ⬦ i[ti] NBS; iti DB • Sircar 1943 seems to have omitted iti.

⟨34⟩ saMvvaT ⬦ saṁvat DCS; sammvat NBS; sa(ṁ) ⟦(mba?)⟧¿vv?aT DB. — ⟨34⟩ 100 20 1 NBS DB ⬦ 100 20 DCS.

Plate

(1–2) Hail ! From Pūrṇakauśikā in the Śr̥ṅgavera territory (vīthī), the officer Acyutadāsa1 and the council greet the village tenants beginning with the brahmins, (residing) next to Hasti (hastiśīrṣe), i.e. in Vibhītakā,2 in Gulmagandhikā, in Dhānyapāṭikā, as well as in their hamlets (sagohāliṣu)3 and inform them :

(2–12) It will be known by you that the chief of the guild (kulika) Bhīma,4 the scribes (kāyastha) Prabhucandra, Rudradāsa, Devadatta, Lakṣmaṇa, Kāntideva, Śambhudatta, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa, the keeper-records (pustapāla) Siṁhanandin and Yaśodāman, all belonging to this territory (vīthī), preceded by the territory-chiefs (vīthīmahattara) Kumāradeva, Gaṇḍaprajāpati, Umayaśas, Rāmaśarman, Jyeṣṭhadāman, Svāmicandra and Harisiṁha, (preceded by) the householders (kuṭumbi) Yaśoviṣṇu, Kumāraviṣṇu, Kumārabhava, Kumārabhūti, Kumāra, Yaśagupta, Vailinaka, Śivakuṇḍa, Vasuśiva, Aparaśiva, Dāmarudra, Prabhamitra, Kr̥ṣṇamitra, Maghaśarman, Iśvaracandra, Rudrabhava, Svāmideva, Śrīnātha, Hariśarman, Guptaśarman, Suśarman, Hari, Alātasvāmin, Brahmasvāmin, Mahāsenabhaṭṭa, Ṣaṣṭhirāta, Gu _ _ _, _ _ śarman, Uṇṭaśarman, Kr̥ṣṇadatta, Nandadāman, Bhavadatta, Ahiśarman, Somaviṣṇu, Lakṣmaṇaśarman, Kāntidhovvoka, Kṣemaśarman, Śukraśarman, Sarppapālita, Kaṅkuṭi, Viśvaśaṅkara, Jayasvāmin, Kaivarttaśarman, Himaśarman, Purandara, Jayaviṣṇu, Uma. . . , Siṁhatta, Bonda, Nārāyanadāsa, Vīranāga, Rājyanāga, Guhamahi, Bhavanātha, Guhaviṣṇu, Śarva, Yaśoviṣṇu, Ṭakkakuladāma . . . . va, Śrīguhaviṣṇu, Rāmasvāmin, Kāmanakuṇḍa, Ratibhadra, Acyutabhadra, Loḍhaka, Prabhakīrti, Jayadatta, Kāluka, Acyuta, Naradeva, Bhava, Bhavarakṣita, Piccakuṇḍa, Pravarakuṇḍa, Śarvadāsa and Gopāla, as well as ourselves inform :

(12–15) In accordance of the rule allowable in this territory (vīthī) that the sale of one kulyavāpa of waste land in exchange of two dīnāras is used for a permanent endowment of a waste land without revenue charges to be enjoyed in perpetuity, we really wish,5 in order to increase the merit of both mothers and fathers of each of us,6 after purchasing nine kulyavāpas (of waste land), give [this land] for the purpose of the performance of the five great sacrifices to the brahmins (named) Devabhaṭṭa, Amaradatta and Mahāsenadatta residing in Puṇdravardhana and belonging to the Vājasaneya school.

(15–17) Precisely in the above-mentionned villages, there are lands recognised as waste by those who are following (ebhis, i.e. the record-keepers?).7 Thus (tad), after receiving an amount of eighteen dīnāras from us, be so kind as to endorse [the sale of] these nine kulyavāpas.

(17–18) Wherefore, after having heard the request of those beginning with the chief of the guild Bhīma, through the investigation of the record-keepers Siṁhanandi and Yaśodāman, what is followed has been established :

(18–19) In this territory the sale of one kulyavāpa in exchange of two dīnāras to be used for a permanent endowment of a waste land without revenue charges to be enjoyed in perpetuity is customary. So (tad), let the gift be made! There is no conflict whatsoever [with your own cultivation].8

(19–24) Once all this (iti) has been established, eighteen dīnāras collected (upasaṁhr̥taka) are taken in cash from those beginning with the chief of the guild Bhīma. The eight kulyavāpas9 are located in the south in Vibhītakī next to Hasti,10 in the villages Dhānyapāṭalikā and Gulmagandhikā,11 in Khanī[2+]dī:

  • one kulyavāpa is located in the north-west of the village Dhānyapāṭalikā surrounded by a recently excavated ditch, with Vāṭā river in the north (and) bordered by the village Gulmagandhikā the in the west;
  • two droṇavāpas are located in the west in Gulmagandhikā with the first road at the east;
  • and also (caiva) seven kulyavāpas and six droṇavāpas (are located) in Citravātaṅgara falling under (prāveśya) Vibhītakī,12 in the hamlets Dayitā and Tāpasa / in Dayitāpotaka and Tāpasapotaka,13 the latter one falling under (the region) close to Hasti (Hastiśīrṣa).

(24–27) In the regions of the above-mentionned villages,14 in order to increase the merits of each mother and father of them, those beginning with the chief of the guild (kulika) Bhīma, the scribes (kāyastha) Prabhucandra, Rudradāsa etc. give nine kulyavāpa are given to these three recipients for the performance of the five great sacrifices (as follows):

  • five kulyavāpas, ku 5, to the Brahmin Devabhaṭṭa,
  • two kulyavāpas to [the Brahmin] Amaradatta,
  • two kulyavāpas, ku 2, to [the Brahmin] Mahāsenadatta.

(27–28) Thus (tad), it is known (nivedyate?) through our [request?] and it is written.

(28–29) Those who (live) in the present time (samupasthita-kālaṁ), i.e., the district officers (viṣayapati), the officers, the peasant householders, the council members, as well as the others who in the near future will be administrating (this land),15 after considering (avekṣya) the benefits of land donation, they will have to protect (this land) as a permanent endowment.

(29–30) And the venerable Vyāsa said in the Mahābhārata:

I
The one who would steal land given by himself or another becomes a worm in excrement and is cooked with his ancestors.16
II
The giver of land resides sixty thousand years in heaven; the one who challenges (a donation) as well as the one who approves (of the challenge) will reside as many [years] in hell.17
III
A man who gives land to a miserable, to someone become poor, to someone emaciated by his way of life, to someone who is dying, by this conduct, he becomes happy and obtains all his desires.18
IV
Numerous holds land and it will be the case again and again. Whoever holds land at a given moment, to him does the fruit belong.19
V
You, Yudhiṣṭhira, most excellent of kings, must strenuously protect land previously given to brahmins. Safeguarding is even better than giving.20

(34) Year 121, (month of) Vaiśakha, day 1.

Commentary

Bibliography

First reported (in passing, by Sanyal) in Sen 1942. First published by Sircar in Bengali, in the journal Vaṅgaśrī (Vaiśākha 1350 Bangla San which is probably also 1943 CE); edited (with plate, from inked impressions) in Sircar 1943, pp. 12–26 with a description of the plate, as well as a commentary on the date, the palaeography, the language and the content of the record. Re-edited (from the original plate) in Sanyal 1955–1956, pp. 57–66. Recorded in Sircar 1959, № 23, s.v. 110, appendix A. Re-edited here by Arlo Griffiths and Amandine Wattelier-Bricout using the reproductions of the plate in Sircar 1943 and in Sanyal 1955–1956 and the photos taken in 2019. The text has been encoded by Amandine Wattelier-Bricout using a digital edition created by Dániel Balogh for the Siddham project as starting point. The text has been translated for the first time by Sircar 1943. Here a new translation including editorial changes has been suggested by Amandine Wattelier-Bricout and still need to be discussed with Arlo Griffiths.

Primary

Sen, Benoychandra. 1942. Some Historical Aspects of the Inscriptions of Bengal [Pre-Muhammadan Epochs]. Calcutta: University of Calcutta. Entry 12.

[DCS] Sircar, Dines Chandra. 1943. “Kalaikuri copper-plate inscription of the Gupta Year 120 (=A.D. 439).” IHQ 19, pp. 12–26. Pages 12–26.

[NBS] Sanyal, Niradbandhu. 1955–1956. “Sultanpur copper-plate inscription.” EI 31, pp. 57–66. Pages 57–66.

Sircar, Dines Chandra. 1965. Select inscriptions bearing on Indian history and civilization. Volume I: from the sixth century B.C. to the sixth century A.D. 2nd edition revised and enlarged. Calcutta: University of Calcutta. Part 3, entry 40A, pages 352–355.

Agrawala, Prithvi Kumar. 1983. Imperial Gupta Epigraphs (गुप्ताधिराजलेखमण्डल). Ancient Indian Epigraphical Sources (प्रत्नाभिलेखसंहिता) X.1. Varanasi: Books Asia. Entry 64.

Goyal, Śrīrām. 1993. गुप्तकालीन अभिलेख/Guptakālīna Abhilekha (Inscriptions of the Gupta Age). Jodhpur: Kusumanjali Prakashan. Pages 166–173.

[DB] Balogh, Dániel, Csaba Kiss and Eszter Somogyi. 2019. “Siddham Epigraphic Archive - Texts in EpiDoc [Data set].” Zenodo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.2574901. [URL]. Item IN00074.

Secondary

Sircar, Dines Chandra. 1959. Annual report on Indian epigraphy for 1955-56. Delhi: Manager of Publications (Department of Archaeology). Item 23, entry 110, appendix A.

Notes

  1. 1. The incipit of this plate is almost identical to the one of Jagadispur Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I. Nevertheless we can notice that here the officer is called Acyutadāsa and that here there is no mention to the fact that his authority depends on the emperor. As the localisation of these two plates is the same and as their dates are relatively close, one can ask if the two officers, called in one plate Acyutadāsa and in the other Acyuta, are the same person. If so, it is interesting to observe the loss of the name ending -dāsa.
  2. 2. As the previous translations of this inscription show it, there are several possibilities to interpret hastiśīrṣe. The translation of Sircar 1943 is somewhat unclear. Indeed, in his translation of the line 1, he reads hastiśīrṣavibhītakyāṁ and translates “residing in Hastiśīrṣavibhītakī”. In line 20, his translation of hastiśīrṣa-vibhītakyāṁ by “Hastiśīrṣavibhītakī” might be supported by the singular locative. But in lines 23-24, the text compells him to consider Hastiśīrṣa an independant place name. At the end of his translation, he adds a note and criticizes the understanding of the place names suggested by Sanyal : “It will be seen from the note that Sanyal has failed to decipher many important passages of the record including several geographical names. His suggestion regarding the two villages Hastiśīrṣa and Vibhītakī is not supported by the passage hastiśīrṣa-vibhītakyāṁ of the text.” Indeed Sanyal 1955–1956, pp. 58–9 doesn’t follow Sircar 1943’s understanding and he considers Hastiśīrṣa and Vibhītakī two different names of village. To clarify the problem, I give below the three contexts where the word hastiśīrṣa appears in the text :

    1. in association with the place name Vibhītakī, but not in compound: hastiśīrṣe vibhītakyāṁ, line 1
    2. in association and in compound with the place name Vibhītakī: hastiśīrṣavibhītakyāṁ, line 20
    3. in compound and in association with another place name Tāpasapotaka : hastiśīrṣaprāveśyatāpasapottake, line 23

    The first interpretation could be to understand a place name ’Hastiśīrṣa’ as Sanyal 1955–1956 did. A second possibility is to see hastiśīrṣa as a compound indicating a large aera. This interpretation is based on my previous observation according to which the geographical indication is presented from the larger to the smaller entity. So it could be possible to consider śīrṣa- a word used in a geographical manner to indicate that some place is near another larger place and hasti- a name of place like Hastināpura? If so, the translation could be “in the upper part of Hasti”, “collateral of Hasti”, “close or next to Hasti”. A third possibility could be to consider hastiśīrṣa a compound composed by the derivated word of the constellation name Hasta followed by śīrṣa, like in the compound mārgaśīrṣa “the month under the constellation of Mr̥ga” (i.e. november-september) which is recorded in Monier-Williams et al. 1899 and by several inscriptions (for example: Betul Charter of Samksobha, year 199, line 3). But the irregular derivation in hastiśīrṣa and the context of its use do not allow a such interpretation.
  3. 3. On the meaning of gohālī, see Griffiths 2018, pp. 40–2
  4. 4. Here I adopted the same translation of the word kulika than in Jagadispur Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I line 16. Indeed, these two plates seem to be close to each other (only two years between their redaction, several identical place names, the same officer) and it is likely the kulika called Bhīma here is identical to the one named Bhīma in Jagadispur Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I.
  5. 5. The redundant use of the optative mode with the verb iṣ- is rendered in the translation by the addition of an intensity adverb.
  6. 6. I attribute to the repetition of prati a distributive function and translate it by ’each of us’.
  7. 7. I am not sure to understand if ebhis qualifies persons or information. Maybe it refers to the record-keepers mentioned in line 17.
  8. 8. As there is no mention of the king’s authority in this plate and given that the expression rājārtthavirodha found in lines 12-13 of the Baigram Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I seems relatively rare by comparing the use of the expression svakarṣaṇāvirodhisthāna found in Baigram Plate line 18, in Paharpur Plate line 19, Nandapur Plate line 13 and in A grant of land to monasteries at Śiṣīpuñja, Madhyamasr̥gālikā and Grāmakūṭagohālī line 23, I suggest supplying “with your own cultivation” instead of “with the king’s interest”. Sircar 1943 translates this sentence by “There is no inconstency [of the petitioners’ prayer with the interest of the state] whatsoever”.
  9. 9. One could be surprised that the scribe mentions here eight kulyavāpas instead of the nine given at the end. Actually the description given below of these eight kulyavāpas includes the localisation of two smaller aeras measuring respectively two droṇavāpas (line 23) and six droṇavāpas (line 23). Precisely, Sircar 1965, n. 1, p. 361, n. 10, p. 293, n. 9, p. 288 mentions in the context of the Paharpur Plate, the Damodarpur Copper-plate Inscription of the time of Kumāragupta I, the Dhanaidaha Copper-plate Inscription that one kulyavāpa equals eight droṇavāpas. Consequently the description made here does include the total of the nine kulyavāpas given.
  10. 10. Here there are three possibilities to understand, analyse or correct hastiśīrṣavibhītakyāṁ :

    1. consider śīrṣa- as an geographical indication and translate “in Vibhītakī next to Hasti”
    2. analyse the singular as a scribal error and correct it by a duel form : hastiśīrṣavibhītakyor “in both Hastiśīrṣa and Vibhītakī”
    3. as Arlo suggests, read vibhītakī in order to have a long compound hastiśīrṣa-vibhītakī-dhānyapāṭalikā-gulmagandhikā-grameṣu “in the villages Hastiśīrṣa, Vibhītakī, Dhānyapāṭalikā and Gulmagandhikā”

  11. 11. Here one would have prefered a dual instead of a plural.
  12. 12. I consider vibhītaka a scribal error as the place name Vibhītakī is well spelled in lines 1 and 20.
  13. 13. It seems to me that the term potaka could refer to a subtype of geographical toponym like in french words "lieu-dit, maison, domaine, propriété, bourgade, hameau, patelin".
  14. 14. One can note the parallelism between the expression eṣu yathopari-nirddiṣṭaka-grāma-pradeśeṣv and the one used in line 15-16 : ebhir evopari-nirddiṣṭaka-grāmeṣu.
  15. 15. The lines 28-29 are really close to the lines 22-24 of the Jagadispur Charter of the Time of Kumāragupta I.
  16. 16. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 132 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
  17. 17. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 123 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200), except for the verb used in the pāda b.
  18. 18. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 78 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
  19. 19. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 23 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
  20. 20. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 131 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).