Mastakaśvabhra Grant of the time of Pradyumnabandhu, year 5
Editors: Amandine Wattelier-Bricout, Arlo Griffiths.
Identifier: DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00063.
Languages: Sanskrit, Source.
Repository: Bengal Copper Plates (tfb-bengalcharters-epigraphy).
Version: (3b1ee6e), last modified (32b4399).
Edition
Primary Seal
⟨1⟩ ghoṇādvīpaka-viṣaye ⟨2⟩ Adhikaraṇasya
Secondary Seal
⟨1⟩ [4×]
Plate
⟨Page 1r⟩ ⟨1⟩ @ svasti⟨.⟩ ma(hā)rājādhirāja-śrī-pradyumnavandhor vvijayādhirājya-samvatsar(e) pañcama Āśvayuja-māsasya dvāviṁśatime divase tad-viniyuktoparika-cellake śrī⟨2⟩-puṇḍravarddhana-bhuktau vyavaharati tat-sam¡v!⟨b⟩addha-ghoṇādvīpaka-viṣaye mahāpratīhārāvadhūtena bhoga-la¡v!⟨b⟩dhe janmāntaropātta-dharmmaprotsāhita-matinaitad-viṣaya-nivāsi-mahā⟨3⟩mahattara-mahattarādayo v(ai)ṣayikās sādhikaraṇā Abhyarthitā⟨.⟩
Icche ’haṁ bhavat-sakāśād viṣaya-maryyādayopakrīya mātā-pittror ātmanaś ca puṇy(ā)bh(i)vr̥ddhaye mastaka⟨4⟩(śvabhra)-grāma(ṁ) saha vījapūraka-vr̥ndena tāmra-paṭṭī-kr̥tya vrāhmaṇāya dātum⟨.⟩
evam-abhyarthitāḥ pratyuktavantas samavadya vijñāpayāma Iti⟨.⟩ yattra mahāmahattarādityadeva-jayadeva⟨5⟩-jāvabhad(r)¿o?⟨ā⟩ (ma)hāmahattara-śarvvadeva-pāṭaka-mahattara-yaśodeva-praśastarudra-mittradeva-bhiloṭa-nivāsi-mahattara-nātharudra-pāṭaka-mahattara-śāntirudra-dharmmarudra⟨6⟩-vār(ddhapriye)ya-mahattara-pavittrasoma-kṣemadeva-ṣaṇḍadvīpa-vāsi-mahattara-gorakakiraṇasvāmi-rudrasvāmi-pravaradvīpa-nivāsi-vrāhmaṇa-gu⟨ha⟩yaśanavadevakula-nivāsi⟨7⟩-mahattara-śambhusvāmi-pippalivanikā-vāstavya-mahattara-bhākideva-pāttravāṭeya-mahattara-gopasoma-śāṅkarapallikeya-bhaṭṭadharmmasvāmi -śivanagara-vāstavya⟨8⟩-bhadrasvāmi-śrīcandra-kṣemaśarmma-dvīpakīya-mahattarāmr̥taśāntanu-varāhakoṭṭaka-vāstavya-mahattara-dharmmakuṇḍa-śivagupta-khātaka-nivāsi-mahattara-jalla-Ārdraleya⟨9⟩-mahattara-jālacandra-śyāmadeva-Audumvarikeya-mahattarābhinandana-malayarudra-karaṇi-kanaradatta-(E/vā)ḍita-devasena-viṣayādhikaraṇika-śambhudatta-kr̥ṣṇadatta⟨10⟩-porudattā⟨⟨da⟩⟩yaḥ sa¡n!⟨ṁ⟩mantrayant¿ī?⟨i⟩⟨.⟩
smāstīyaṁ maryyādā pūrvva-sādhubhir apy u⟨⟨pa⟩⟩krīya nānā-vaiṣ¿ai?⟨a⟩yika-janapadād devakula-vihāra-brāhmaṇa-viśeṣebhyo ’tisr̥ṣṭāni viṣaya-grāma-maṇḍa⟨11⟩la-kṣettrāṇi pūrvva-rājabhiś cānumoditāni śūnyā ca bhūmir avatiṣṭhamānā na kaṁ cid apy upakāraṁ rājñaḥ karoty evaṁ-prakāreṇa punar ddīyamānā dr̥ṣṭādr̥ṣṭa-phala-pradā bhava⟨12⟩ty asya ca grāmasyoparikarā bhāvya{ṁ}-varṣiṇa⟨ḥ⟩ pañcacatvāriṁśat kārṣāpaṇā yad anyad v[i]ṣayābhāvyaṁ tad asmābhir avacūrṇya voḍhavyaṁ kutaḥ yato vayaṁ viṣaya-nimittaṁ hira⟨13⟩ṇy(e)nārthino ’yaṁ ca mahāpratīhārāvadhūtaḥ prahvo ’bhyarthayati yuktam asya sa-phalaṁ vijñāpya-karmmam ity avadhr̥tavanto⟨.⟩
’vadhr̥tya ca viṣaya-vārikai⟨r⟩ grāma-mūlyaṁ cūrṇikā⟨14⟩-sahasra(ṁ) grāhayitvā śravaṇa-nimittaṁ ca gandha-puṣpa-vastrāṇi saha (v)ījapūraka-vr̥ndena mastakaśvabhra-grāma(ṁ) mahāpratīhārāvadhūta-haste vikrītavantas⟨.⟩
tenāpy upakr(ī)ya k(ā)⟨15⟩ty(ā)yana-sa-gottrāya vājasaneyasa-vrahmacāriṇe bhogadeva-puttrā⟨⟨ya⟩⟩ vrāhmaṇa-jayadevāya puttra-pauttrādi-bhogya-krameṇā-candrārkka-kālīnaḥ pañca-mah(ā)-yajña-pravarttan(ā)ya ⟨16⟩ {ya}⟨.⟩
pratipādito ’sya ca mastakaśvabhra-grāmasya sīmā-liṅgāni bhavanti⟨.⟩
yattra pūrvvasyāṁ diśi srotikā Uttarasyām iyam (e)va t¡r̥!⟨ri⟩ghaṭṭikāṁ praviśya śmaśānena paści⟨17⟩masyāṁ diśy omrakhātaḥ dakṣiṇasyāṁm apy (e)tad-anulagnena śr̥ṅgāṭaka-villikānusāreṇa vr̥hacchaṅka-joṭā tad-an(u)sāreṇa kāṇālatīya-śālmalī-samīpena punaḥ ⟨18⟩ srotikā yāvad iti⟨.⟩
l(i)khitaṁ kāraṇika-śam(bhudatte)na tāpitaṁ pusta-pāla-kr̥ṣṇadattena samvat· 5 Aśva di 20 2⟨.⟩
Asminn evārthe manvādayaḥ ślokān udāha⟨19⟩ranti sma⟨.⟩
I. Anuṣṭubh
sva-dattāṁ para(da)¿tt?⟨t⟩ām vā
ayo hareta vasundharā¿ṁ?⟨m⟩
bsa viṣṭhāyāṁ kr̥mir bhūtvā
cpitr̥bhis saha pac¿c?⟨y⟩ate||
dII. Anuṣṭubh
ṣaṣṭi⟨ṁ⟩ varṣa-sahasrāṇi
asvargge modati bhūmi⟨20⟩daḥ
bĀkṣeptā cānumantā ca
ctāny eva narake vaseT||
dIII. Anuṣṭubh
vahubhir vasudhā dattā
arājabhis sagarādibhiḥ
byasya yasya yadā bhūmis
ctasya tasya ⟨21⟩ tadā phala¡ṁ!⟨m⟩||
dIV. Anuṣṭubh
yānaśayyā-prado bhāryyāM
asukham akṣayyam anna-daḥ
bbhūmi-das sarvvam āpnoti
cgo-do vradhnasya viṣ¿ṭh?⟨ṭ⟩apa¡(ṁ)!⟨m⟩||◯||
dApparatus
Secondary Seal
⟨1⟩ [4×] • Given that only four akṣaras seem to be engraved, an hypothetical reading pradyumnabandhoḥ must be excluded.
Plate
⟨1⟩ samvatsar(e) pañcama • Or read -samvatsarapañcama? No trace of -e can be made out with certainty, and although it is possible to assume that it was originally written and since effaced, assuming its original absence could be supported, e.g., by the sequence vijayarājyasaṁvatsaraśate in the Karamdanda inscription of Kumāragupta (Bhandarkar et al. 1981, p. 285, l. 3, n. 5 and Balogh et al. 2019, № IN00025).
⟨2⟩ matinaitad ⬦ -matenaitad- ?.
⟨4⟩ samavadya • It seems that this needs to be emended samudya or (although neither of these forms would be acceptable in chaste Sanskrit) samodya or saṁvadya. — ⟨4⟩ Iti yattra • Perhaps to be read as ity attra. It seems that iti would have been better suited after dātum.
⟨5⟩ -jāvabhad(r)¿o?⟨ā⟩ ⬦ -[śi](vabhad)[r](o) ?.
⟨6⟩ -vār(ddhapriye)ya- ⬦ -vā(rṣagrime)ya- ?. — ⟨6⟩ ṣaṇḍadvīpa-vāsi-mahattara- • Perhaps emend ṣaṇḍadvīpa-nivāsi-mahattara. — ⟨6⟩ gu⟨ha⟩yaśa • Emend guhayaśa. Cf. the Kotalipada plate, line 5.
⟨7⟩ śāṅkara • Correct śaṅkara?
⟨9⟩ -(E/vā)ḍita-_ ⬦ -Eḍita(nu)- ?.
⟨12⟩ bhāvya{ṁ}-varṣiṇa⟨ḥ⟩ ⬦ bhāvya{ṁ}-varṣiṇa ?. — ⟨12⟩ v[i]ṣayābhāvyaṁ • Is viṣaya-ābhāvyaṁ ‘unavailability of viṣaya’ intended?
⟨13⟩ vijñāpyakarmma • Or understand vijñāpya karmma? — ⟨13⟩ ’bhyarthayati • A middle verb form would have been better here. Maybe -ti is simply a mistake for -te.
⟨17⟩ omrakhātaḥ ⬦ o(ptr)akh(ā)taḥ ? • Is omrakhātaḥ an error for āmrakhātaḥ “Mango canal”? — ⟨17⟩ śr̥ṅgāṭaka-villikānusāreṇa • Correct śr̥ṅgāṭaka-villikā tadanusāreṇa?
⟨19⟩ ṣaṣṭi⟨ṁ⟩ varṣa° ⬦ ṣaṣṭi-varṣa° ?.
Translation by Arlo Griffiths
Primary Seal
(Seal) of the council in Ghoṇādvīpaka district
Secondary Seal
[…]
Plate : first translation
(1–3) Hail! In the fifth year of the victorious suzerainty of the suzerain of great kings Śrī Pradyumnabandhu, on the twenty-second day of the month Āśvayuja, when his appointee as governor, (named) Cellaka, was managing affairs (vyavaharati) 1 in Śrī Puṇḍravardhana province, when the Ghoṇā-island district falling under it had been obtained as fief by the great chamberlain Avadhūta, (at that time) the people of the district, beginning with the great notables and the notables, together with the council, were requested by him (i.e. Avadhūta) whose mind was inspired by merits acquired in a previous life: 2
(3–4) “I wish to make donation of the village Mastakaśvabhra along with its citron-grove to a Brahmin, after purchasing [it] from you, in accordance with the custom of the district, for the sake of increasing the merit of my parents and myself, and after making it a tract of land with copperplate (deed of purchase).”
(4–10) Having been thus requested, they answered: “We inform (as follows) after having spoken together.3 In this matter (yatra), the great notables Ādityadeva, Jayadeva and Jāvabhadra; the great notable Śarvadeva; the hamlet notables Yaśodeva, Praśastarudra and Mitradeva; residing in Bhiloṭa, the notable Nātharudra; the hamlet notables Śāntirudra and Dharmarudra; from Vr̥ddhapriya, the notables Pavitrasoma and Kṣemadeva; residing on Ṣaṇḍa-island, the notables Gaurakakiraṇasvāmin and Rudrasvāmin; residing on Pravara-island, the Brahmin Guhayaśas; residing in Navadevakula, the notable Śambhusvāmin; residing in Pippalivanikā, the notable Bhākideva; from Patravāṭa, the notable Gopasoma; from Śaṅkarapallika, Bhaṭṭadharmasvāmin; residing in Śivanagara, Bhadrasvāmin, Śrīcandra and Kṣemaśarman; from the island, the notable Amr̥taśāntanu; residing in Varāhakoṭṭaka, the notables Dharmakuṇḍa and Śivagupta; residing in Khātaka, the notable Jalla; from Ardrala, the notables Jālacandra and Śyāmadeva; from Audumvarika, the notables Abhinandana and Malayarudra [as well as] the scribes (karaṇika) Naradatta, Eḍita/Vāḍita and Devasena; the district councilors Śambhudatta, Kr̥ṣṇadatta, Paurudatta, and others, have deliberated.” 4
(10–13) They have confirmed (avadhr̥tavantas): “There is this custom — also by good people in the past, fields in the surroundings of district villages have been purchased donated to temples, monasteries and excellent Brahmins; and kings in the past have given their consent. And the land renders no benefit whatsoever to the king as long as it is lying fallow; if (on the other hand), it is once again, in the stated fashion, made the object of donation, it will yield fruit in this world and the next. 5 And this village’s additional taxes (uparikara) for the coming years are forty-five kārṣāpaṇas. What other income of the district there will be, that must be divided and borne by us. 6 From what source? (We do not have any source from which to pay these taxes.) Therefore, on account of the district, we are in need of cash. And this great chamberlain Avadhūta humbly requests an act that is proper and fruitful for this (village), object of (the present) report”. 7
(13–14) “And after having confirmed (this), we have let the district arbitrators 8 receive a thousand cūrṇikās 9 as price of the village as well as incense, flowers and garments on the occasion of hearing (of the king’s assent?), 10 and we have sold the village Mastakaśvabhra, along with its citron grove, into the hand of the great chamberlain Avadhūta.”
(14–16) And after he had bought it, by him it has been made over to the Brahmin Jayadeva, belonging to the Kātyāyana gotra, student of the Vājasaneya (school of the Yajurveda), son of Bhogadeva, to be enjoyed in sequence by his sons, grandsons, and so on, as long as moon and sun shall last, for purpose of the regular performance of the five great sacrifices.
(16–18) And the boundary markers of this village Mastakaśvabhra are, in this connection (yatra): in the East, the stream; in the North, the same, after it has entered the Trighaṭṭikā (river) by the cremation ground; in the West, the Omra canal; in the South, too, along the latter, after the Śr̥ṅgāṭaka (‘Crossroad’) pond, the Br̥hacchaṅkajoṭā (‘Great-Conch-Joṭā’); after the latter, down again to the stream near the silk cotton tree of Kāṇālatī.
(18) Engraved by the scribe Śambhudatta, 11 heated by the record-keeper Kr̥ṣṇadatta. Year 5, day 22.
(18–19) And Manu and so on used to cite stanzas in this same sense:
I
The one who would steal land given by himself or another becomes a worm in excrement and is cooked with his ancestors.12
II
The giver of land revels 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.13
III
Numerous kings, starting with Sagara, have given land. Whoever holds land at a given moment, to him does the fruit belong.14
IV
One who gives a carriage or bed obtains a wife; one who gives food [obtains] permanent bliss; one who gives land [obtains] everything (at once); one who gives cattle [obtains] the summit of the sun.15
Plate : new translation
(1–3) Hail! In the fifth year of the victorious suzerainty of the suzerain of great kings mahārājādhirāja Śrī Pradyumnabandhu, on the twenty-second day of the month Āśvayuja, when his appointee as governor, (named) Cellaka, was managing affairs (vyavaharati) 16 in Śrī Puṇḍravardhana province, when the Ghoṇā-island district falling under it had been obtained as fief by the great chamberlain Avadhūta, (at that time) the people of the district, beginning with the great notables and the notables, together with the council, were requested by him (i.e. Avadhūta) whose mind was inspired by merits acquired in a previous life: 17
(3–4) “I wish to make donation of the village Mastakaśvabhra along with its citron-grove to a Brahmin, after purchasing [it] from you, in accordance with the custom of the district, for the sake of increasing the merit of my parents and myself, and after making it a tract of land with copperplate (deed of purchase).”
(4–10) Having been thus requested , they answered : “We shall deliberate and inform.” On this matter (yattra), the great notables Ādityadeva, Jayadeva and Jāvabhadra; the great notable Śarvadeva; the hamlet notables Yaśodeva, Praśastarudra and Mitradeva; residing in Bhiloṭa,18 the notable Nātharudra; the hamlet notables Śāntirudra and Dharmarudra; from Vr̥ddhapriya, the notables Pavitrasoma and Kṣemadeva; residing on Ṣaṇḍa-island, the notables Gaurakakiraṇasvāmin and Rudrasvāmin; residing on Pravara-island, the Brahmin Guhayaśas; residing in Navadevakula, the notable Śambhusvāmin; residing in Pippalivanikā, the notable Bhākideva; from Patravāṭa, the notable Gopasoma; from Śaṅkarapallika, Bhaṭṭadharmasvāmin; residing in Śivanagara, Bhadrasvāmin, Śrīcandra and Kṣemaśarman; from Dvīpaki (the small island), the notable Amr̥taśāntanu; residing in Varāhakoṭṭaka, the notables Dharmakuṇḍa and Śivagupta; residing in Khātaka, the notable Jalla; from Ardrala, the notables Jālacandra and Śyāmadeva; from Audumvarika, the notables Abhinandana and Malayarudra [as well as] the scribes (karaṇika) Naradatta, Eḍita/Vāḍita and Devasena; the district councilors Śambhudatta, Kr̥ṣṇadatta, Paurudatta, and others, [then] deliberated.
(10–13) They ascertained (avadhr̥tavanto) (the following points) :
- There is this custom, — also (followed) by good people in the past : “After being purchased from various people of the district, fields in the surroundings of district villages are donated to (these) types (of recipients) -temples, monasteries and Brahmins- and in past, (these transactions) were ratified by kings; yet the land, as long as it is lying fallow, renders no benefit whatsoever to the king, if (on the other hand), it is once again made the object of donation in the stated fashion, it will yield fruit in this world and the next.”19
- And this village’s additional taxes (uparikara) for the coming years are forty-five kārṣāpaṇas.
- What other income of the district there will be, that must be divided and borne by us.20 From what source? (We do not have any source from which to pay these taxes.)
- Therefore, on account of the district, we are in need of cash.
- And this great chamberlain Avadhūta humbly requests an act that is proper and fruitful for this (village), object of (the present) report. 21
(13–14) And having ascertained (these points), they have let the district arbitrators22 receive a thousand cūrṇikās as price of the village as well as incense, flowers and garments under the auspicious sign of the constellation of Śravaṇa23 (and) they sold the village Mastakaśvabhra, along with its citron grove, into the hand of the great chamberlain Avadhūta.
(14–16) And after he had bought it, by him it has been made over to the Brahmin Jayadeva, belonging to the Kātyāyana gotra, student of the Vājasaneya (school of the Yajurveda), son of Bhogadeva, to be enjoyed in sequence by his sons, grandsons, and so on, as long as moon and sun shall last, for purpose of the regular performance of the five great sacrifices.
(16–18) And the boundary markers of this village Mastakaśvabhra are, in this connection (yatra): in the East, the stream; in the North, the same, after it has entered the Trighaṭṭikā (river) by the cremation ground; in the West, the Omra canal; in the South, too, along the latter, after the Śr̥ṅgāṭaka (‘Crossroad’) pond, the Br̥hacchaṅkajoṭā (‘Great-Conch-Joṭā’); after the latter, down again to the stream near the silk cotton tree of Kāṇālatī.
(18) Engraved by the scribe Śambhudatta, 24 heated by the record-keeper Kr̥ṣṇadatta. Year 5, Āśvayuja month day 22.
(18–19) And Manu and so on used to cite stanzas in this same sense:
I
The one who would steal land given by himself or another becomes a worm in excrement and is cooked with his ancestors.25
II
The giver of land revels 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.26
III
Numerous kings, starting with Sagara, have given land. Whoever holds land at a given moment, to him does the fruit belong.27
IV
One who gives a carriage or bed obtains a wife; one who gives food [obtains] permanent bliss; one who gives land [obtains] everything (at once); one who gives cattle [obtains] the summit of the sun.28
Bibliography
First edited by Arlo Griffiths. Re-edited here with small improvements based on direct inspection of the plate, in particular the place names Jāvabhadra (line 5), Vr̥ddhapriya (line 6) and Omrakhāta (line 17). Therefore, a new translation including these new readings and some other improvments is proposed here by Arlo Griffiths and Amandine Wattelier-Bricout.
Primary
[G] Griffiths, Arlo. 2015. “New Documents for the Early History of Puṇḍravardhana: Copperplate Inscriptions from the Late Gupta and Early Post-Gupta Periods.” PSJA New Series 6, pp. 15–38. [URL]. Item II, pages 27–33.
Secondary
Griffiths, Arlo. 2015. “New Documents for the Early History of Puṇḍravardhana: Copperplate Inscriptions from the Late Gupta and Early Post-Gupta Periods.” PSJA New Series 6, pp. 15–38. [URL]. Item II, pages 27–33.
Notes
- 1. For similar expressions, see Damodarpur plate #1, lines 3–6 (emended): tan-niyuktaka-kumārāmātya-vetravarmaṇy adhiṣṭhāṇādhikaraṇañ ca nagara-śreṣṭhi-dhr̥tipāla-sārthavāha-bandhumitra-prathamakulika-dhr̥timitra-prathamakāyastha-śāmbapāla-puroge saṁvyavaharati; Damodarpur plate #3, lines 1–2 (emended): puṇḍravardhana-bhuktāv uparika-mahārāja-brahmadatte saṁvyavaharati.
- 2. Cf. the Jayarampur plate, line 7: sākṣād dharmma ivopāttajanmā. Despite the availability of this parallel, the idea of an embodied Dharma does not seem to suit our context.
- 3. The placement of iti in line 4 is somewhat problematic. In a personal communication, Yuko Yokochi suggests to me that the structure is strange because the content of the vijñapti comes after iti, due to the length of what was informed. I translate as though one more iti stood between dātum and evam.
- 4. In translating all the references to the places of residence of the members of council, I have assumed that no significant difference of meaning is conveyed by the choice of terms (ni)vāsin or vāstavya (both rendered as ‘residing in’), while both of these seem also to be synonymous with the use of a nominal derivative in -eya (‘from’)
- 5. Cf. The Panchrol plate, lines 23–25 (emended): cira-khila-śūnyāvaskarāyāṁ bhūmāv avatiṣṭhamānāyāṁ na kāñ cid artha-māttrāṁ rājñaḥ puṣṇāty asya ca rājño dharmma-phala-ṣaḍ-bhāga-prāptir asty eva yato dīyatām iti; and the Ghugrahati plate, line 13–15 (emended): rājño dharmārtha-niṣphalā yā tu bhogyā kr̥tā bhūmir nr̥pasyaivārtha-dharma-kr̥t tad asmai vrāhmaṇāya dīyatām iti.
- 6. On the sense of the word ābhāvya, see Furui 2011, p. 150: “accompanied by all the contributions supposed to go to the royal family (rāja-kulābhāvya-sarva-pratyāya-sameta)”. It is glossed as ‘income or proceeds’ by Sircar 1966, p. 1. In the present context, one might wonder if it means income from the district to the king, or separate revenue to be collected and used at district level, because the translation of voḍhavya depends on this. I settle in favor of the former interpretation by comparing the Mallasarul plate, lines 12–13 (emended): tat sampadyatām asyābhiprāya ity asmad-vāra-kr̥tair anena dattaka-dīnārān [saṁgr̥hya] vīthyāṁ samvibhajyāsmadvettra-garttāgrāme ’ṣṭābhyaḥ kulyavāpebhyo yathocitaṁ dānaṁ tad-vīthī-samudaya eva prāṇāyyaṁ voḍhavyam ity avacūrṇyāṣṭau kulyavāpā mahā-rāja-vijayasenasya dattāḥ. See Sircar 1942, p. 375, n. 5, who explains “prāṇāyyaṁ = honestly. vīthīsamudaye = in the revenue, i.e. revenue account, of the vīthī. voḍhavya = to be borne. dāna = deya = dues. avacūrṇya = apaviñchya”.
- 7. It is difficult to know how to divide the text into sentences in line 13. I only know one Bengal inscription using yuktam in a similar context, i.e. the Panchrol plate, lines 21–23 (emended): etad-dharmma-sahita-vacanām upaśrutyāsmābhir yair uparilikhitakair anyonyāvadhāraṇayāvadhr̥taṁ yuktam ayaṁ prārthayate.
- 8. The term viṣayavārika is not found elsewhere in early Bengal inscriptions. Ryosuke Furui has recommended me to compare it with the functionaries named kulavārika and vārakr̥ta, appointed as arbitrators by the adhikaraṇa and mahattaras, in the Faridpur #3, Mallasarul and Ghugrahati plates. Sircar 1965, p. 371, n. 5, p. 375, n. 3 has suggested that kulavāra possibly means ‘arbitrator’, and that the meaning of vārakr̥ta seems related.
- 9. Comparison with line 12 suggests that taxes were calculated in the currency unit of kārṣāpaṇa (Sircar 1966, p. 149), whereas land was paid for in cowrie shells: according to Chattopadhyaya 1977, p. 53, the term cūrṇikā “possibly meant a sum of the value of 10 kapardas or cowries used as coins”. While the unit figures elsewhere in early Bengal epigraphy only in the Jayarampur plate (line 31), the unit kārṣāpaṇa seems not to be used anywere else in Bengal epigraphy at all (see Chattopadhyaya 1977, pp. 57–60). Our plate thus provides valuable new light on the monetary system of early post-Gupta Bengal.
- 10. The meaning of the expression śravaṇanimittam in this context is not clear to me, and I can find no parallels for it in other inscriptions. The phrase ājñāśravaṇavidheya, frequent e.g. in the Pāla corpus, is translated by Kielhorn 1896–1897, p. 254 (Khalimpur Plate, line 55) as ‘ready to obey our commands’.
- 11. Ryosuke Furui points out to me that karaṇika here could also be an abbreviation of adhikaraṇika, if this Śambhudatta is the same as the viṣayādhikaraṇika of that name who figures in line 9.
- 12. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 132 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
- 13. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 123 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
- 14. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 23 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
- 15. This verse corresponds to the pādas ab and ef of the verse numbered 145 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
- 16. For similar expressions, see Damodarpur plate #1, lines 3–6 (emended): tan-niyuktaka-kumārāmātya-vetravarmaṇy adhiṣṭhāṇādhikaraṇañ ca nagara-śreṣṭhi-dhr̥tipāla-sārthavāha-bandhumitra-prathamakulika-dhr̥timitra-prathamakāyastha-śāmbapāla-puroge saṁvyavaharati; Damodarpur plate #3, lines 1–2 (emended): puṇḍravardhana-bhuktāv uparika-mahārāja-brahmadatte saṁvyavaharati.
- 17. Cf. the Jayarampur plate, line 7: sākṣād dharmma ivopāttajanmā. Despite the availability of this parallel, the idea of an embodied Dharma does not seem to suit our context.
- 18. In translating all the references to the places of residence of the members of council, I have assumed that no significant difference of meaning is conveyed by the choice of terms (ni)vāsin or vāstavya (both rendered as ‘residing in’), while both of these seem also to be synonymous with the use of a nominal derivative in -eya (‘from’)
- 19. Cf. The Panchrol plate, lines 23–25 (emended): cira-khila-śūnyāvaskarāyāṁ bhūmāv avatiṣṭhamānāyāṁ na kāñ cid artha-māttrāṁ rājñaḥ puṣṇāty asya ca rājño dharmma-phala-ṣaḍ-bhāga-prāptir asty eva yato dīyatām iti; and the Ghugrahati plate, line 13–15 (emended): rājño dharmārtha-niṣphalā yā tu bhogyā kr̥tā bhūmir nr̥pasyaivārtha-dharma-kr̥t tad asmai vrāhmaṇāya dīyatām iti.
- 20. On the sense of the word ābhāvya, see Furui 2011, p. 150: “accompanied by all the contributions supposed to go to the royal family (rāja-kulābhāvya-sarva-pratyāya-sameta)”. It is glossed as ‘income or proceeds’ by Sircar 1966, p. 1. In the present context, one might wonder if it means income from the district to the king, or separate revenue to be collected and used at district level, because the translation of voḍhavya depends on this. I settle in favor of the former interpretation by comparing the Mallasarul plate, lines 12–13 (emended): tat sampadyatām asyābhiprāya ity asmad-vāra-kr̥tair anena dattaka-dīnārān [saṁgr̥hya] vīthyāṁ samvibhajyāsmadvettra-garttāgrāme ’ṣṭābhyaḥ kulyavāpebhyo yathocitaṁ dānaṁ tad-vīthī-samudaya eva prāṇāyyaṁ voḍhavyam ity avacūrṇyāṣṭau kulyavāpā mahā-rāja-vijayasenasya dattāḥ. See Sircar 1942, p. 375, n. 5, who explains “prāṇāyyaṁ = honestly. vīthīsamudaye = in the revenue, i.e. revenue account, of the vīthī. voḍhavya = to be borne. dāna = deya = dues. avacūrṇya = apaviñchya”.
- 21. It is difficult to know how to divide the text into sentences in line 13. I only know one Bengal inscription using yuktam in a similar context, i.e. the Panchrol plate, lines 21–23 (emended): etad-dharmma-sahita-vacanām upaśrutyāsmābhir yair uparilikhitakair anyonyāvadhāraṇayāvadhr̥taṁ yuktam ayaṁ prārthayate.
- 22. The term viṣayavārika is not found elsewhere in early Bengal inscriptions. Ryosuke Furui has recommended me to compare it with the functionaries named kulavārika and vārakr̥ta, appointed as arbitrators by the adhikaraṇa and mahattaras, in the Faridpur #3, Mallasarul and Ghugrahati plates. Sircar 1965, p. 371, n. 5, p. 375, n. 3 has suggested that kulavāra possibly means ‘arbitrator’, and that the meaning of vārakr̥ta seems related.
- 23. In Griffiths 2015, the expression śravaṇanimittam has been translated by “on the occasion of hearing (of the king’s assent)” with the following note : “The meaning of the expression śravaṇanimittam in this context is not clear to me, and I can find no parallels for it in other inscriptions. The phrase ājñāśravaṇavidheya, frequent e.g. in the Pāla corpus, is translated by Kielhorn 1896–1897, p. 254 (Khalimpur Plate, line 55) as ‘ready to obey our commands’.”. Here we suggest three other understandings of this expression. The first possibility is to supply an other word instead of the ’king’s consent’ and to assume it is the hearing of the prescribed mantras that must be recited during the gift-ceremony. The second possibility is to translate it as an adverbial accusative in the sense of “according to the śruti (or Vedic texts)” (Monier-Williams et al. 1899 : nimitta “in fine compositi caused or occasioned by” and śravaṇa “the act of hearing, also ’that which is heard’ equals śruti-”). Finally, considering two specific meanings of each member of the coumpound - nimitta as omen and śravaṇa as the name of the 20th (or 23rd) nakṣatra presided over by Viṣṇu -, the expression śravaṇanimittam could be understand ’under the sign of Śravaṇa’ and could express the time during which the transation should be made. In order to choose between these several meanings, one could take a look on the procedure of making gift described in the Agnipurāṇa, chapter 209. The verses 209.49cd-50 mention what the donor and the donee should say. The verses 209.56-63 detail the qualities of the donee, the auspicious place and time for the gift. This latter is defined by the position of the moon and the sun in the sky (Agnipurāṇa 209.57 : somārkagrahaṇasaṅkrāntyādau ca kālake ’in a darkness (moment) as the passage or the eclipse of the moon or the sun etc.’). Finally the verses 209.61-63 quotes the formula which should be recited. And the chapter 209 ends on this sentence : anena dānavākyena sarvadānāni vai dadet ’One must give all gifts by using this sentence of donation’. As this source belongs to smr̥ti literature and as the words to be recited are not coming from the Veda, the translation ’in the occasion the hearing of the prescribed mantras’ could be accepted whereas the one ’according to the śruti’ is less likely. As the verses 209.49cd-50 of the Agnipurāṇa prescribe the time of the gift according to the planet positions, as the pāda 209.48d specifies that Viṣṇu is the presiding deity of all things given (sarveṣāṃ viṣṇudevatā), idea which seems to be shared by others sources and be quoted by several Dharmanibandha authors (see Kane 1941, book 2.2, p. 855) and finally, as the constellation Śravaṇa is presided over by Viṣṇu, the third translation “under the auspicious sign of the constellation of Śravaṇa” has been retained here.
- 24. Ryosuke Furui points out to me that karaṇika here could also be an abbreviation of adhikaraṇika, if this Śambhudatta is the same as the viṣayādhikaraṇika of that name who figures in line 9.
- 25. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 132 among the Bhūmi Stanzas listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
- 26. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 123 among the Bhūmi Stanzas listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
- 27. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 23 among the Bhūmi Stanzas listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
- 28. This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 145ab and 145ef among the Bhūmi Stanzas listed by Sircar (see Sircar 1965, appendix II, pp. 170–200).
- 29. Cf. Furui 2015, p. 267: “The political condition of Pupdravardhana after the mid-sixth century is unclear, due to the lack of contemporary sources. It can be surmised retrospectively from the inscriptions of the ninth century that this sub-region also experienced some tendencies witnessed in the other sub-regions.” The inscription nicely confirms Furui’s surmise.
- 30. Liṅgapurāṇa, uttarabhāga, chapter 27, stanza 158. On the textual history and ritual context of this part of the Liṅgapurāṇa, see Sanderson 2009, pp. 250, 258. Yuko Yokochi points out to me that śoṇā might be the river Son, though it is usually denoted by the masculine noun śoṇa.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-model href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/erc-dharma/project-documentation/master/schema/latest/DHARMA_Schema.rng" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"?>
<?xml-model href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/erc-dharma/project-documentation/master/schema/latest/DHARMA_Schema.rng" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron"?>
<?xml-model href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/erc-dharma/project-documentation/master/schema/latest/DHARMA_SQF.sch" type="application/xml" schematypens="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron"?>
<?xml-model href="https://epidoc.stoa.org/schema/latest/tei-epidoc.rng" schematypens="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"?>
<?xml-model href="https://epidoc.stoa.org/schema/latest/tei-epidoc.rng" schematypens="http://purl.oclc.org/dsdl/schematron"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:lang="eng">
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title>Mastakaśvabhra Grant of the time of Pradyumnabandhu, year 5</title>
<respStmt>
<resp>EpiDoc Encoding</resp>
<persName ref="part:amwb">
<forename>Amandine</forename>
<surname>Wattelier-Bricout</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
<respStmt>
<resp>intellectual authorship of edition</resp>
<persName ref="part:argr">
<forename>Arlo</forename>
<surname>Griffiths</surname>
</persName>
<persName ref="part:amwb">
<forename>Amandine</forename>
<surname>Wattelier-Bricout</surname>
</persName>
</respStmt>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<authority>DHARMA</authority>
<pubPlace>Cambrai</pubPlace>
<idno type="filename">DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00063</idno>
<availability>
<licence target="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
<p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported
Licence. To view a copy of the licence, visit
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ or send a letter to
Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View,
California, 94041, USA.</p>
<p>Copyright (c) 2019-2025 by Arlo Griffiths and Amandine Wattelier-Bricout.</p>
</licence>
</availability>
<date from="2019" to="2025">2019-2025</date>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><!-- only the handDesc can be filled in at this stage -->
<msDesc><!-- //// NB: the msIdentifier had to be added for validation purposes ///. It will be edited later with the metadata spreadsheet -->
<msIdentifier>
<repository>DHARMAbase</repository>
<idno type="filename">DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00063</idno>
</msIdentifier>
<msContents><!-- describe the intellectual content of an inscription -->
<summary><!-- //// NOT MANDATORY ////--></summary> <!-- offers the possibility to give a summary of the inscription's content -->
</msContents>
<physDesc>
<handDesc>
<p>The script, which is identical on plate and seal, is a variety of Late Eastern Brāhmī that may palaeographically be assigned to about the 6th century CE. Among noteworthy features, I may mention the following. Vocalization <foreign>ā</foreign> is without exception in the form of a hook open toward the right placed on top of the <foreign>akṣara</foreign>, not recorded by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Dani1986_01"/></bibl> but well attested in Bengal epigraphy, for instance in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00002.xml">Kotalipada plate</ref>. For vocalization <foreign>ī</foreign>, we consistently find a shape, not represented by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Dani1986_01"/></bibl>, which is formed by a wave first moving upwards, then turning downward and finally slanting again in upward direction, again a feature shared with the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00002.xml">Kotalipada plate</ref>. The <foreign>akṣara</foreign>s <foreign>ka</foreign> and <foreign>ra</foreign> have long descenders; <foreign>ṣa</foreign> and <foreign>sa</foreign> are clearly distinct, <foreign>ṣa</foreign> being based on the shape of <foreign>pa</foreign>; the shape of <foreign>ya</foreign> is always tripartite, consistently with an outward curl at the left extremity. By contrast with the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00002.xml">Kotalipada plate</ref>, the shape of <foreign>ha</foreign> is here consistently one that resembles the type <q><foreign>ha</foreign> with its base dipping down</q> (<bibl><ptr target="bib:Dani1986_01"/><citedRange unit="page">289</citedRange></bibl>). The shape of <foreign>dh</foreign> has a pronounced dent in the left bulge, a type not recorded by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Dani1986_01"/></bibl>. The opening symbol is that which current scholarship considers to represent the word <foreign>siddham</foreign> (see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Griffiths+Southworth2007_01"/><citedRange unit="page">352</citedRange></bibl>, note 10 for references); the final fleuron is a variant of the wheel motif (<bibl><ptr target="bib:Sarkar+Pande1999_01"/><citedRange unit="page">58</citedRange></bibl>), the best parallel known to me being found in a late-8th-century inscription of Campā in modern Vietnam (<bibl><ptr target="bib:Griffiths+Southworth2011_01"/></bibl> face A, end of l. 7, fig. 3).</p>
</handDesc>
</physDesc>
</msDesc>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<encodingDesc>
<projectDesc>
<p>The project DHARMA has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement no 809994).</p>
</projectDesc>
<schemaRef type="guide" key="EGDv01" url="https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02888186"/><!-- UPDATE the link once the release is made official -->
<listPrefixDef>
<prefixDef ident="bib" matchPattern="([a-zA-Z0-9\-\_]+)" replacementPattern="https://www.zotero.org/groups/1633743/erc-dharma/items/tag/$1">
<p>Public URIs with the prefix bib to point to a Zotero Group Library named ERC-DHARMA whose data are open to the public.</p>
</prefixDef>
<prefixDef ident="part" matchPattern="([a-z]+)" replacementPattern="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/erc-dharma/project-documentation/master/DHARMA_IdListMembers_v01.xml#$1">
<p>Internal URIs using the part prefix to point to person elements in the <ref>DHARMA_IdListMembers_v01.xml</ref> file.</p>
</prefixDef>
</listPrefixDef>
</encodingDesc>
<revisionDesc>
<change when="2021-11-08" who="part:amwb">Added the handDesc by copying remarks from Griffiths2015_02's article</change>
<change when="2021-10-21" who="part:amwb">Revision of my encoding and corrections</change>
<change who="part:amwb" when="2021-06-01">started initial encoding of the inscription</change>
</revisionDesc>
</teiHeader>
<text xml:space="preserve">
<body>
<div type="edition" xml:lang="san-Latn">
<div type="textpart" n="A"><head xml:lang="eng">Primary Seal</head>
<ab><lb n="1"/>ghoṇādvīpaka-viṣaye
<lb n="2"/>Adhikaraṇasya</ab>
</div>
<div type="textpart" n="B"><head xml:lang="eng">Secondary Seal</head>
<ab><lb n="1"/><gap reason="illegible" quantity="4" unit="character"/>
<!-- <gap reason="illegible" quantity="1" unit="line"/> -->
</ab>
</div>
<div type="textpart" n="C"><head xml:lang="eng">Plate</head>
<p><pb n="1r"/><lb n="1"/><g type="spiralR"/> svasti<supplied reason="omitted">.</supplied> ma<unclear>hā</unclear>rājādhirāja-śrī-pradyumnavandhor vvijayādhirājya-samvatsar<unclear>e</unclear> pañcama Āśvayuja-māsasya dvāviṁśatime divase tad-viniyuktoparika-cellake śrī<lb n="2" break="no"/>-puṇḍravarddhana-bhuktau vyavaharati tat-sam<choice><orig>v</orig><reg>b</reg></choice>addha-ghoṇādvīpaka-viṣaye mahāpratīhārāvadhūtena bhoga-la<choice><orig>v</orig><reg>b</reg></choice>dhe janmāntaropātta-dharmmaprotsāhita-matinaitad-viṣaya-nivāsi-mahā<lb n="3" break="no"/>mahattara-mahattarādayo v<unclear>ai</unclear>ṣayikās sādhikaraṇā Abhyarthitā<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></p>
<p> Icche 'haṁ bhavat-sakāśād viṣaya-maryyādayopakrīya mātā-pittror ātmanaś ca puṇy<unclear>ā</unclear>bh<unclear>i</unclear>vr̥ddhaye mastaka<lb n="4" break="no"/><unclear>śvabhra</unclear>-grāma<unclear>ṁ</unclear> saha vījapūraka-vr̥ndena tāmra-paṭṭī-kr̥tya vrāhmaṇāya dātum<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></p>
<p>evam-abhyarthitāḥ pratyuktavantas samavadya vijñāpayāma Iti<supplied reason="omitted">.</supplied> yattra mahāmahattarādityadeva-jayadeva<lb n="5" break="no"/>-jāvabhad<unclear>r</unclear><choice><sic>o</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice> <unclear>ma</unclear>hāmahattara-<space/>śarvvadeva-<space/>pāṭaka-mahattara-yaśodeva-<space/>praśastarudra-mittradeva-<space/>bhiloṭa-nivāsi-<space/>mahattara-nātharudra-<space/>pāṭaka-mahattara-<space/>śāntirudra-dharmmarudra<!--
amwb : according to my own reading of the plate, I removed a space after mahattara
--><lb n="6" break="no"/>-vār<unclear>ddhapriye</unclear>ya-mahattara-pavittrasoma-kṣemadeva-<space/>ṣaṇḍadvīpa-vāsi-mahattara-gorakakiraṇasvāmi-<space/>rudrasvāmi-<space/>pravaradvīpa-nivāsi-vrāhmaṇa-gu<supplied reason="omitted">ha</supplied>yaśa<space/>navadevakula-nivāsi<lb n="7" break="no"/>-mahattara-śambhusvāmi-<space/>pippalivanikā-vāstavya-mahattara-bhākideva-<space/>pāttravāṭeya-mahattara<space/>-gopasoma-<space/>śāṅkarapallikeya-bhaṭṭadharmmasvāmi -<space/>śivanagara-vāstavya<!--
amwb : according to my own reading of the plate, I added a space after mahattara --><lb n="8" break="no"/>-bhadrasvāmi-śrīcandra<space/>-kṣemaśarmma-dvīpakīya-mahattarāmr̥taśāntanu-varāhakoṭṭaka-vāstavya-mahattara-dharmmakuṇḍa-<space/>śivagupta-khātaka-nivāsi<space/>-mahattara-jalla-<space/>Ārdraleya<!--
amwb : according to my own reading I added one space after śrīcandra and one after nivāsi
--><lb n="9" break="no"/>-mahattara-jālacandra-śyāmadeva-<space/>Audumvarikeya-mahattarābhinandana-<space/>malayarudra-<space/>karaṇi-kanaradatta-<choice><unclear>E</unclear><unclear>vā</unclear></choice>ḍita-<space/>devasena-viṣayādhikaraṇika-śambhudatta<space/>-kr̥ṣṇadatta<!--
amwb : according to my own reading I added one space after śambhudatta
--><lb n="10" break="no"/>-porudattā<add place="below">da</add>yaḥ <space/> sa<choice><orig>n</orig><reg>ṁ</reg></choice>mantrayant<choice><sic>ī</sic><corr>i</corr></choice><supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></p>
<p>smāstīyaṁ maryyādā pūrvva-sādhubhir apy u<add place="below">pa</add>krīya nānā-vaiṣ<choice><sic>ai</sic><corr>a</corr></choice>yika-janapadād devakula-vihāra-brāhmaṇa-viśeṣebhyo 'tisr̥ṣṭāni viṣaya-grāma-maṇḍa<lb n="11" break="no"/>la-kṣettrāṇi pūrvva-rājabhiś cānumoditāni śūnyā ca bhūmir avatiṣṭhamānā na kaṁ cid apy upakāraṁ rājñaḥ karoty<!-- maybe emend karotīty --> evaṁ-prakāreṇa punar ddīyamānā dr̥ṣṭādr̥ṣṭa-phala-pradā bhava<lb n="12" break="no"/>ty asya ca grāmasyoparikarā bhāvya<surplus>ṁ</surplus>-varṣiṇa<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied> pañcacatvāriṁśat kārṣāpaṇā yad anyad v<supplied reason="lost">i</supplied>ṣayābhāvyaṁ tad asmābhir avacūrṇya voḍhavyaṁ kutaḥ yato vayaṁ viṣaya-nimittaṁ hira<lb n="13" break="no"/>ṇy<unclear>e</unclear>nārthino 'yaṁ ca mahāpratīhārāvadhūtaḥ prahvo 'bhyarthayati yuktam asya sa-phalaṁ vijñāpya-karmmam ity avadhr̥tavanto<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></p>
<p>'vadhr̥tya ca viṣaya-vārikai<supplied reason="omitted">r</supplied> grāma-mūlyaṁ cūrṇikā<lb n="14" break="no"/>-sahasra<unclear>ṁ</unclear> grāhayitvā śravaṇa-nimittaṁ ca gandha-puṣpa-vastrāṇi saha <unclear>v</unclear>ījapūraka-vr̥ndena mastakaśvabhra-grāma<unclear>ṁ</unclear> mahāpratīhārāvadhūta-haste vikrītavantas<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></p>
<p>tenāpy upakr<unclear>ī</unclear>ya k<unclear>ā</unclear><lb n="15" break="no"/>ty<unclear>ā</unclear>yana-sa-gottrāya vājasaneyasa-vrahmacāriṇe bhogadeva-puttrā<add place="inline">ya</add> vrāhmaṇa-jayadevāya puttra-pauttrādi-bhogya-krameṇā-candrārkka-kālīnaḥ pañca-mah<unclear>ā</unclear>-yajña-pravarttan<unclear>ā</unclear>ya<lb n="16"/><surplus>ya</surplus><supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></p>
<p>pratipādito 'sya ca mastakaśvabhra-grāmasya sīmā-liṅgāni bhavanti<supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></p>
<p>yattra pūrvvasyāṁ diśi srotikā <space/> Uttarasyām iyam <unclear>e</unclear>va t<choice><orig>r̥</orig><reg>ri</reg></choice>ghaṭṭikāṁ praviśya śmaśānena paści<lb n="17" break="no"/>masyāṁ diśy omrakhātaḥ <space/> dakṣiṇasyāṁm apy <unclear>e</unclear>tad-anulagnena śr̥ṅgāṭaka-villikānusāreṇa vr̥hacchaṅka-joṭā tad-an<unclear>u</unclear>sāreṇa kāṇālatīya-śālmalī-samīpena punaḥ<lb n="18"/>srotikā yāvad iti<space/><supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></p>
<p>l<unclear>i</unclear>khitaṁ kāraṇika-śam<unclear>bhudatte</unclear>na tāpitaṁ pusta-pāla-kr̥ṣṇadattena samvat· <num value="5">5</num> <space/> <abbr>Aśva</abbr> <abbr>di</abbr> <num value="22">20 2</num><space/><supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></p>
<p> Asminn evārthe manvādayaḥ ślokān udāha<lb n="19" break="no"/>ranti sma<space/><supplied reason="subaudible">.</supplied></p><!--
amwb: according to my own reading, I added a space before the stanza
-->
<lg n="1" met="anuṣṭubh" corresp="#Sircar1965_st0132">
<l n="a">sva-dattāṁ para<unclear>da</unclear><choice><sic>tt</sic><corr>t</corr></choice>ām vā<space/></l><!--
amwb: according to my own reading, I added a space before the next pāda
--><l n="b">yo hareta vasundharā<choice><sic>ṁ</sic><corr>m</corr></choice><space/></l><!--
amwb: according to my own reading, I added a space before the next pāda
-->
<l n="c">sa viṣṭhāyāṁ kr̥mir bhūtvā<space/></l><!--
amwb: according to my own reading, I added a space before the next pāda
--><l n="d">pitr̥bhis saha pac<choice><sic>c</sic><corr>y</corr></choice>ate<g type="ddandaHooked">.</g></l></lg>
<lg n="2" met="anuṣṭubh" corresp="#Sircar1965_st0123">
<l n="a">ṣaṣṭi<supplied reason="omitted">ṁ</supplied> varṣa-sahasrāṇi<space/></l><!--
amwb: according to my own reading, I added a space before the next pāda
--><l n="b">svargge modati bhūmi<lb n="20" break="no"/>daḥ</l>
<l n="c">Ākṣeptā cānumantā ca<space/></l><!--
amwb: according to my own reading, I added a space before the next pāda
--><l n="d">tāny eva narake vaseT<g type="ddandaHooked">.</g></l></lg>
<lg n="3" met="anuṣṭubh" corresp="#Sircar1965_st0023">
<l n="a">vahubhir vasudhā dattā<space/></l><!--
amwb: according to my own reading, I added a space before the next pāda
--><l n="b">rājabhis sagarādibhiḥ</l>
<l n="c">yasya yasya yadā bhūmi<space/>s</l><!--
amwb: according to my own reading, I added a space after bhūmi in order to represent the fact that the next pāda begins with a ligature
--><l n="d">tasya tasya <lb n="21"/>tadā phala<choice><orig>ṁ</orig><reg>m</reg></choice><g type="ddandaHooked">.</g></l></lg>
<lg n="4" met="anuṣṭubh">
<l n="a">yānaśayyā-prado bhāryyā<foreign>M</foreign></l>
<l n="b">sukham akṣayyam anna-daḥ</l>
<l n="c">bhūmi-das sarvvam āpnoti<space/></l><!--
amwb: according to my own reading, I added a space before the next pāda and a second at the beginning of pāda d because the space is equivalent to the two akṣaras
-->
<l n="d"><space/>go-do vradhnasya viṣ<choice><sic>ṭh</sic><corr>ṭ</corr></choice>apa<choice><orig><unclear>ṁ</unclear></orig><reg>m</reg></choice><g type="ddandaHooked">.</g><g type="circleWheel"/><g type="ddandaHooked">.</g><!--
amwb : it is the second danda (the right one) who is hooked, not the left one as all other ddandaHooked in this plate
--></l></lg><pb n="1v"/>
</div>
</div>
<div type="apparatus">
<div type="textpart" n="B"><head xml:lang="eng">Secondary Seal</head>
<listApp>
<app loc="1">
<lem><gap reason="illegible" quantity="4" unit="character"/></lem>
<note>Given that only four <foreign>akṣara</foreign>s seem to be engraved, an hypothetical reading <foreign>pradyumnabandhoḥ</foreign> must be excluded.</note>
</app>
</listApp>
</div>
<div type="textpart" n="C"><head xml:lang="eng">Plate</head>
<listApp>
<app loc="1">
<lem>samvatsar<unclear>e</unclear> pañcama</lem>
<note>Or read -<foreign>samvatsarapañcama</foreign>? No trace of -<foreign>e</foreign> can be made out with certainty, and although it
is possible to assume that it was originally written and since effaced, assuming its original absence could be supported, e.g., by the sequence <foreign>vijayarājyasaṁvatsaraśate</foreign> in the Karamdanda inscription of Kumāragupta<!--
amwb : add a tag ref when the inscription is encoded in DHARMABASE. For the moment, there is no reference number in Bengal Inscriptions Metadata (Googlesheets), but there is the file IN00025_TEI.xml; For I have included its bibliographical ref
--> (<bibl><ptr target="bib:Bhandarkar1981_01"/><citedRange unit="page">285</citedRange><citedRange unit="line">3</citedRange><citedRange unit="note">5</citedRange></bibl> and <bibl><ptr target="bib:Balogh+al2019_01"/><citedRange unit="item">IN00025</citedRange></bibl>).</note>
</app>
<app loc="2">
<lem>matinaitad</lem>
<rdg source="bib:Griffiths2015_02">-<foreign>matenaitad</foreign>-</rdg>
</app>
<app loc="4">
<lem>samavadya</lem>
<note>It seems that this needs to be emended <foreign>samudya</foreign> or (although neither of these forms would be acceptable in chaste Sanskrit) <foreign>samodya</foreign> or <foreign>saṁvadya</foreign>.</note>
</app>
<app loc="4">
<lem>Iti yattra</lem>
<note>Perhaps to be read as <foreign>ity attra</foreign>. It seems that <foreign>iti</foreign> would have been better suited after <foreign>dātum</foreign>.</note>
</app>
<app loc="5">
<lem>-jāvabhad<unclear>r</unclear><choice><sic>o</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice></lem>
<rdg source="bib:Griffiths2015_02">-<supplied reason="lost">śi</supplied><unclear>vabhad</unclear><supplied reason="lost">r</supplied><unclear>o</unclear></rdg>
</app>
<app loc="6">
<lem>-vār<unclear>ddhapriye</unclear>ya-</lem>
<rdg source="bib:Griffiths2015_02">-vā<unclear>rṣagrime</unclear>ya-</rdg>
</app>
<app loc="6">
<lem>ṣaṇḍadvīpa-vāsi-mahattara-</lem>
<note>Perhaps emend <foreign>ṣaṇḍadvīpa-nivāsi-mahattara</foreign>.</note>
</app>
<app loc="6">
<lem>gu<supplied reason="omitted">ha</supplied>yaśa</lem>
<note>Emend <foreign>guhayaśa</foreign>. Cf. the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00002.xml">Kotalipada plate</ref>, line 5.</note>
</app>
<app loc="7">
<lem>śāṅkara</lem>
<note>Correct <foreign>śaṅkara</foreign>?<!-- Je ne comprends pas cette note, si j'ai bien suivi les noms de lieux d'origine ont une voyelle augmentée ex : vārṣagrimeya rendu par varṣagrima pāttravāṭeya rendu par patravāṭa donc śāṅkara serait correct? --></note>
</app>
<app loc="9">
<lem>-<choice><unclear>E</unclear><unclear>vā</unclear></choice>ḍita-<space/></lem>
<rdg source="bib:Griffiths2015_02">-Eḍita<unclear>nu</unclear>-</rdg>
<!--amwb : I have removed the note from the 20135 article : <note><foreign>vāḍita(<unclear>nu</unclear>)</foreign>: the reading is very uncertain as a whole, the presence of a fourth <foreign>akṣara</foreign> even more so. Can we read <foreign>krīḍita</foreign>?</note>
-->
</app>
<app loc="12">
<lem>bhāvya<surplus>ṁ</surplus>-varṣiṇa<supplied reason="omitted">ḥ</supplied></lem>
<rdg source="bib:Griffiths2015_02">bhāvya<surplus>ṁ</surplus>-varṣiṇa</rdg>
</app>
<app loc="12">
<lem>v<supplied reason="lost">i</supplied>ṣayābhāvyaṁ</lem>
<note>Is <foreign>viṣaya-ābhāvyaṁ</foreign> ‘unavailability of <foreign>viṣaya</foreign>’ intended?</note>
</app>
<app loc="13">
<lem>vijñāpyakarmma</lem>
<note>Or understand <foreign>vijñāpya karmma</foreign>?</note>
</app>
<app loc="13">
<lem>'bhyarthayati</lem>
<note>A middle verb form would have been better here. Maybe -<foreign>ti</foreign> is simply a mistake for -<foreign>te</foreign>.</note>
</app>
<app loc="17">
<lem>omrakhātaḥ</lem>
<rdg source="bib:Griffiths2015_02">o<unclear>ptr</unclear>akh<unclear>ā</unclear>taḥ</rdg>
<note>Is <foreign>omrakhātaḥ</foreign> an error for <foreign>āmrakhātaḥ</foreign> <q>Mango canal</q>?</note>
</app>
<app loc="17">
<lem>śr̥ṅgāṭaka-villikānusāreṇa</lem>
<note>Correct <foreign>śr̥ṅgāṭaka-villikā tadanusāreṇa</foreign>?</note>
</app>
<app loc="19">
<lem>ṣaṣṭi<supplied reason="omitted">ṁ</supplied> varṣa°</lem>
<rdg source="bib:Griffiths2015_02">ṣaṣṭi-varṣa°</rdg>
</app>
</listApp>
</div>
</div>
<div type="translation" resp="part:argr">
<div type="textpart" n="A"><head xml:lang="eng">Primary Seal</head>
<ab><supplied reason="explanation">Seal</supplied> of the council in Ghoṇādvīpaka district</ab>
</div>
<div type="textpart" n="B"><head xml:lang="eng">Secondary Seal</head>
<ab><gap reason="illegible"/></ab>
</div>
<div type="textpart" n="C" resp="part:argr"><head xml:lang="eng">Plate : first translation</head>
<p n="1-3">Hail! In the fifth year of the victorious suzerainty of the suzerain of great kings Śrī Pradyumnabandhu,
on the twenty-second day of the month Āśvayuja, when his appointee as governor,
<supplied reason="explanation">named</supplied> Cellaka,
was managing affairs <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vyavaharati</foreign></supplied>
<note>For similar expressions, see <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00047.xml">Damodarpur plate #1</ref>, lines 3–6 (emended): <foreign>tan-niyuktaka-kumārāmātya-vetravarmaṇy adhiṣṭhāṇādhikaraṇañ ca nagara-śreṣṭhi-dhr̥tipāla-sārthavāha-bandhumitra-prathamakulika-dhr̥timitra-prathamakāyastha-śāmbapāla-puroge saṁvyavaharati</foreign>; <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00032.xml">Damodarpur plate #3</ref>, lines 1–2 (emended): <foreign>puṇḍravardhana-bhuktāv uparika-mahārāja-brahmadatte saṁvyavaharati</foreign>.</note>
in Śrī Puṇḍravardhana province,
when the Ghoṇā-island district falling under it had been obtained
as fief by the great chamberlain Avadhūta,
<supplied reason="explanation">at that time</supplied> the people of the district,
beginning with the great notables and the notables,
together with the council,
were requested by him <supplied reason="explanation">i.e. Avadhūta</supplied>
whose mind was inspired by merits acquired in a previous life:
<note>Cf. the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00076">Jayarampur plate</ref>, line 7: <foreign>sākṣād dharmma ivopāttajanmā</foreign>. Despite the availability of this parallel, the idea of an embodied Dharma does not seem to suit our context.</note></p>
<p n="3-4"><q>I wish to make donation of the village Mastakaśvabhra
along with its citron-grove to a Brahmin,
after purchasing <supplied reason="subaudible">it</supplied> from you,
in accordance with the custom of the district,
for the sake of increasing the merit of my parents and myself,
and after making it a tract of land with copperplate <supplied reason="explanation">deed of purchase</supplied>.</q></p>
<p n="4-10">Having been thus requested, they answered: <q>We inform <supplied reason="explanation">as follows</supplied>
after having spoken together.<note>The placement of <foreign>iti</foreign> in line 4 is somewhat problematic. In a personal communication, Yuko Yokochi suggests to me that the structure is strange because the content of the <foreign>vijñapti</foreign> comes after <foreign>iti</foreign>, due to the length of what was informed. I translate as though one more <foreign>iti</foreign> stood between <foreign>dātum</foreign> and <foreign>evam</foreign>.</note>
In this matter <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>yatra</foreign></supplied>,
the great notables Ādityadeva, Jayadeva and Jāvabhadra;
the great notable Śarvadeva;
the hamlet notables Yaśodeva, Praśastarudra and Mitradeva;
residing in Bhiloṭa, the notable Nātharudra;
the hamlet notables Śāntirudra and Dharmarudra;
from Vr̥ddhapriya, the notables Pavitrasoma and Kṣemadeva;
residing on Ṣaṇḍa-island, the notables Gaurakakiraṇasvāmin and Rudrasvāmin;
residing on Pravara-island, the Brahmin Guhayaśas;
residing in Navadevakula, the notable Śambhusvāmin;
residing in<!-- En note, tu expliques que tu n'as pas fait de distinction entre -vāsi/-nivāsi et -vāstavya. Il est vrai que les deux sont très proches mais j'ai le sentiment qu'il y a eu un choix des mots dans cette inscription et qu'il doit y avoir une nuance, d'autant que 2 des 3 noms de lieux avec vāstavya peuvent potentiellemnt être liés à des centres sivaïtes auquel cas remplacer les "residing in" traduisant l'expression -vāstavya par une autre expression (par exemple settled in X ou X-inhabitant) --> Pippalivanikā, the notable Bhākideva;
from Patravāṭa, the notable Gopasoma; from Śaṅkarapallika, Bhaṭṭadharmasvāmin;
residing in<!-- l'expression -vāstavya comme précédemment --> Śivanagara, Bhadrasvāmin, Śrīcandra and Kṣemaśarman;
from the island<!-- ici on n'a pas dvīpa comme dans les autres noms de lieux en -dvīpa mais dvīpakīya, peut-être "la petite île ou Dvīpaki voir §189 Renou pour la dérivation en aki- dite péjorative -->, the notable Amr̥taśāntanu;
residing in<!-- l'expression -vāstavya comme précédemment --> Varāhakoṭṭaka, the notables Dharmakuṇḍa and Śivagupta;
residing in Khātaka, the notable Jalla;
from Ardrala, the notables Jālacandra and Śyāmadeva;
from Audumvarika, the notables Abhinandana and Malayarudra <supplied reason="subaudible">as well as</supplied> the scribes <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>karaṇika</foreign></supplied> Naradatta, Eḍita/Vāḍita and Devasena;
the district councilors Śambhudatta, Kr̥ṣṇadatta, Paurudatta, and others, have deliberated.</q>
<note>In translating all the references to the places of residence of the members of council, I have assumed that no significant difference of meaning is conveyed by the choice of terms (<foreign>ni</foreign>)<foreign>vāsin</foreign> or <foreign>vāstavya</foreign> (both rendered as ‘residing in’), while both of these seem also to be synonymous with the use of a nominal derivative in -eya (‘from’)</note><!-- note à revoir ou pas en fonction du choix de traduction que tu feras --></p>
<p n="10-13">They have confirmed <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>avadhr̥tavantas</foreign></supplied>:
<q>There is this custom
— also<!-- ajouter qqch entre parenthèses pour le sens: par ex <supplied reason="explanation">followed/established/performed</supplied> --> by good people in the past,
fields in the surroundings of district villages have been purchased<!-- ici je garderai la construction sanskrite "once purchased from various people of the district, fields in the surroundings of district villages was donated to (these) categories/types (of recipients) -temples monasteries and Brahmins- and in past, (these transactions) were ratified by kings; yet the land, as long as it is lying fallow, renders no benefit whatsoever to the king" + J'ai trouvé des choses intéressantes sur la terre en jachère chez Kaane 1941 vol 2 p.868 recherche à approfondir-\-> from various people of the district,
and<!-\- si on ne change pas la structure "and" doit être mis en supplied car non présent en sanskrit --> donated to temples, monasteries and excellent Brahmins<!-- pour moi vi'se.sa en fin de composé ne qualifie pas les brahmanes mais introduit une liste, donne les différents "recipient" possibles -->;
and kings in the past have given their consent.
And<!-- je propose de traduire ce "ca" par un "yet" car j'ai le sentiment d'une opposition entre le fait d'être ratifié par le roi et le fait de ne rien rapporter tant que c'est en jachère--> the land renders no benefit whatsoever to the king as long as it is lying fallow;
if <supplied reason="explanation">on the other hand</supplied>, it is once again,
in the stated fashion, made the object of donation,
it will yield fruit in this world and the next.
<note>Cf. The <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00064.xml">Panchrol plate</ref>, lines 23–25 (emended): <foreign>cira-khila-śūnyāvaskarāyāṁ bhūmāv avatiṣṭhamānāyāṁ na kāñ cid artha-māttrāṁ rājñaḥ puṣṇāty asya ca rājño dharmma-phala-ṣaḍ-bhāga-prāptir asty eva yato dīyatām iti</foreign>; and the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00003.xml">Ghugrahati plate</ref>, line 13–15 (emended): <foreign>rājño dharmārtha-niṣphalā yā tu bhogyā kr̥tā bhūmir nr̥pasyaivārtha-dharma-kr̥t tad asmai vrāhmaṇāya dīyatām iti</foreign>.</note>
And this village’s additional taxes <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>uparikara</foreign></supplied>
for the coming years are forty-five <foreign>kārṣāpaṇa</foreign>s.
What other income of the district there will be, that must be divided and borne by us.
<note>On the sense of the word <foreign>ābhāvya</foreign>, see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Furui2011_01"/><citedRange unit="page">150</citedRange></bibl>: “accompanied by all the contributions supposed to go to the royal family (<foreign>rāja-kulābhāvya-sarva-pratyāya-sameta</foreign>)”. It is glossed as ‘income or proceeds’ by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">1</citedRange></bibl>. In the present context, one might wonder if it means income from the district to the king, or separate revenue to be collected and used at district level, because the translation of <foreign>voḍhavya</foreign> depends on this. I settle in favor of the former interpretation by comparing the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00084.xml">Mallasarul plate</ref>, lines 12–13 (emended): <foreign>tat sampadyatām asyābhiprāya ity asmad-vāra-kr̥tair anena dattaka-dīnārān <supplied reason="undefined">saṁgr̥hya</supplied> vīthyāṁ samvibhajyāsmadvettra-garttāgrāme 'ṣṭābhyaḥ kulyavāpebhyo yathocitaṁ dānaṁ tad-vīthī-samudaya eva prāṇāyyaṁ voḍhavyam ity avacūrṇyāṣṭau kulyavāpā mahā-rāja-vijayasenasya dattāḥ</foreign>. See <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1942_01"/><citedRange unit="page">375</citedRange><citedRange unit="note">5</citedRange></bibl>, who explains “<foreign>prāṇāyyaṁ</foreign> = honestly. <foreign>vīthīsamudaye</foreign> = in the revenue, i.e. revenue account, of the <foreign>vīthī</foreign>. <foreign>voḍhavya</foreign> = to be borne. <foreign>dāna</foreign> = <foreign>deya</foreign> = dues. <foreign>avacūrṇya</foreign> = <foreign>apaviñchya</foreign>”.</note>
From what source? <supplied reason="explanation">We do not have any source from which to pay these taxes.</supplied>
Therefore, on account of the district, we are in need of cash.
And this great chamberlain Avadhūta humbly requests an act that is proper and fruitful for this <supplied reason="explanation">village</supplied>, object of <supplied reason="explanation">the present</supplied> report</q>.
<note>It is difficult to know how to divide the text into sentences in line 13. I only know one Bengal inscription using <foreign>yuktam</foreign> in a similar context, i.e. the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00064.xml">Panchrol plate</ref>, lines 21–23 (emended): <foreign>etad-dharmma-sahita-vacanām upaśrutyāsmābhir yair uparilikhitakair anyonyāvadhāraṇayāvadhr̥taṁ yuktam ayaṁ prārthayate</foreign>.</note></p>
<p n="13-14"><q>And after having confirmed <supplied reason="explanation">this</supplied>,
we have let the district arbitrators
<note>The term <foreign>viṣayavārika</foreign> is not found elsewhere in early Bengal inscriptions. Ryosuke Furui has recommended me to compare it with the functionaries named <foreign>kulavārika</foreign> and <foreign>vārakr̥ta</foreign>, appointed as arbitrators by the <foreign>adhikaraṇa</foreign> and <foreign>mahattara</foreign>s, in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00081.xml">Faridpur #3</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00084.xml">Mallasarul</ref> and <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00003.xml">Ghugrahati</ref> plates. <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/><citedRange unit="page">371</citedRange><citedRange unit="note">5</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">375</citedRange><citedRange unit="note">3</citedRange></bibl> has suggested that <foreign>kulavāra</foreign> possibly means ‘arbitrator’, and that the meaning of <foreign>vārakr̥ta</foreign> seems related.</note>
receive a thousand <foreign>cūrṇikā</foreign>s
<note>Comparison with line 12 suggests that taxes were calculated in the currency unit of <foreign>kārṣāpaṇa</foreign> (<bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">149</citedRange></bibl>), whereas land was paid for in cowrie shells: according to <bibl><ptr target="bib:Chattopadhyaya1977_02"/><citedRange unit="page">53</citedRange></bibl>, the term <foreign>cūrṇikā</foreign> “possibly meant a sum of the value of 10 <foreign>kaparda</foreign>s or cowries used as coins”. While the unit figures elsewhere in early Bengal epigraphy only in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00076.xml">Jayarampur plate</ref> (line 31), the unit <foreign>kārṣāpaṇa</foreign> seems not to be used anywere else in Bengal epigraphy at all (see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Chattopadhyaya1977_02"/><citedRange unit="page">57-60</citedRange></bibl>). Our plate thus provides valuable new light on the monetary system of early post-Gupta Bengal.</note>
as price of the village
as well as incense, flowers and garments on the occasion of hearing <supplied reason="explanation" cert="low">of the king’s assent</supplied><!-- pour ce point j'ai deux autres hypothèses pour comprendre le texte
Hypothèse 1: śravaṇanimittam renvoie au fait que les dons sont des actes ritualisés par la śruti qui exige un don d'encens de fleurs et de vêtements lors d'une transaction et dans ce cas, śravaṇa renverrait à la source (śruti) et nimittam serait à traduire par "en raison de" ,
soit hypothèse 2: śravaṇanimittam désigne le moment de la récitation des mantra qui accompagnent le don d'encens, vêtements et fleurs et dans ce cas on sous-entend "of the prescribed mantra". Cette deuxième hypothèse peut être appuyée par la littérature prescriptive voir Kaane 1941 vol 2 p.855-856 (recherche à approfondir qui pourrait même faire l'objet d'un post-doc dans le cadre de DHARMA : étude parallèle des sources prescriptives sur le don (notamment terre) et témoignages épigraphiques encodés on pourrait même centrer sur le Bengale avec des compilateurs comme Hemaadri -->,
<note>The meaning of the expression <foreign>śravaṇanimittam</foreign> in this context is not clear to me, and I can find no parallels for it in other inscriptions. The phrase <foreign>ājñāśravaṇavidheya</foreign>, frequent e.g. in the Pāla corpus, is translated by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Kielhorn1896-1897_03"/><citedRange unit="page">254</citedRange></bibl> (Khalimpur Plate, line 55) as ‘ready to obey our commands’.</note>
and<!-- and à supprimer ou à mettre en supplied car non présent en sanskrit --> we have sold the village Mastakaśvabhra,
along with its citron grove,
into the hand of the great chamberlain Avadhūta.</q></p>
<p n="14-16">And after he had bought it,
by him it has been made over to the Brahmin Jayadeva,
belonging to the Kātyāyana <foreign>gotra</foreign>, student of the Vājasaneya <supplied reason="explanation">school of the Yajurveda</supplied>,
son of Bhogadeva, to be enjoyed in sequence by his sons, grandsons, and so on,
as long as moon and sun shall last,
for purpose of the regular performance of the five great sacrifices.<!-- Il pourrait être intéressant d'ajouter une note sur le fait que la terre donnée va servir à la réalisation des 5 grands sacrifices (Kaane 1941 2.1 chapitre XVIII p.696-704). Dans l'article de Ghoshal p. 74(Ghoshal, U. (1965). THE POSITION OF THE BRĀHMAṆAS IN ANCIENT BENGAL. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 46(1/4), 67-80. Retrieved June 9, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org.proxy-sigb.college-de-france.fr/stable/41694180), il est justement question de deux inscriptions gupta où on mentionne la réalisation de ces 5 grands sacrifices. Cette présente inscription ajoute une 3ème témoignage de cette pratique au Bengale et la 39 Raktamala Grant 1 ajoute aussi une référence de plus et 57 Raktamala 2 sous entendue.
En lisant les quatre Dharmasūtra Āpastamba, Gautama, Baudhāyana et Vasiṣṭha, je m'aperçois que les "grands sacrifices" sont mentionnés par Āpastamba, il ne donne pas le nombre mais explicite 5 choses à réaliser (1.12.13 à 1.13.1, p.45-46 Olivelle) ; ils sont absents de Gautama et sont appelés comme "cinq grands sacrifices" par Baudhāyana qui détaille encore plus que Āpastamba (voir 2.11.1-8 p. 277-279 Olivelle )
Chez Manu, les 5 grands sacrifices sont décrits MS III.68-80 --></p>
<p n="16-18">And the boundary markers of this village Mastakaśvabhra are,
in this connection <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>yatra</foreign></supplied>:
in the East, the stream; in the North, the same, after it has entered the Trighaṭṭikā <supplied reason="explanation">river</supplied> by the cremation ground;
in the West, the Omra canal; in the South, too, along the latter, after the Śr̥ṅgāṭaka <supplied reason="explanation">‘Crossroad’</supplied> pond, the Br̥hacchaṅkajoṭā <supplied reason="explanation">‘Great-Conch-Joṭā’</supplied>;
after the latter, down again to the stream near the silk cotton tree of Kāṇālatī.</p>
<p n="18">Engraved by the scribe Śambhudatta,
<note>Ryosuke Furui points out to me that <foreign>karaṇika</foreign> here could also be an abbreviation of <foreign>adhikaraṇika</foreign>, if this Śambhudatta is the same as the <foreign>viṣayādhikaraṇika</foreign> of that name who figures in line 9.</note>
heated by the record-keeper Kr̥ṣṇadatta. Year 5, <!-- Āśvayuja month?? le nom du mois est omis dans la traduction, il faut l'ajouter --> day 22.</p>
<p n="18-19">And Manu and so on used to cite stanzas in this same sense:</p>
<p n="1" rend="stanza">The one who would steal land given by himself or another becomes a worm in excrement and is cooked with his ancestors.<note>
This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 132 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.
</note></p>
<p n="2" rend="stanza">The giver of land revels sixty thousand years in heaven; the one who challenges <supplied reason="explanation">a donation</supplied> as well as the one who approves <supplied reason="explanation">of the challenge</supplied> will reside as many <supplied reason="subaudible">years</supplied> in hell.<note>
This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 123 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.
</note></p>
<p n="3" rend="stanza">Numerous kings, starting with Sagara, have given land. Whoever holds land at a given moment, to him does the fruit belong.<note>
This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 23 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.
</note></p>
<p n="4" rend="stanza">One who gives a carriage or bed obtains a wife; one who gives food <supplied reason="subaudible">obtains</supplied> permanent bliss; one who gives land <supplied reason="subaudible">obtains</supplied> everything <supplied reason="explanation">at once</supplied>; one who gives cattle <supplied reason="subaudible">obtains</supplied> the summit of the sun.<note>
This verse corresponds to the <foreign>pāda</foreign>s ab and ef of the verse numbered 145 among the Stanzas on Bhūmidāna listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.
</note>
</p>
</div>
<div type="textpart" n="D" resp="part:amwb"><head xml:lang="eng">Plate : new translation</head>
<p n="1-3">Hail! In the fifth year of the victorious suzerainty of the suzerain of great kings <foreign>mahārājādhirāja</foreign> Śrī Pradyumnabandhu,
on the twenty-second day of the month Āśvayuja, when his appointee as governor,
<supplied reason="explanation">named</supplied> Cellaka,
was managing affairs <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>vyavaharati</foreign></supplied>
<note>For similar expressions, see <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00047.xml">Damodarpur plate #1</ref>, lines 3–6 (emended): <foreign>tan-niyuktaka-kumārāmātya-vetravarmaṇy adhiṣṭhāṇādhikaraṇañ ca nagara-śreṣṭhi-dhr̥tipāla-sārthavāha-bandhumitra-prathamakulika-dhr̥timitra-prathamakāyastha-śāmbapāla-puroge saṁvyavaharati</foreign>; <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00032.xml">Damodarpur plate #3</ref>, lines 1–2 (emended): <foreign>puṇḍravardhana-bhuktāv uparika-mahārāja-brahmadatte saṁvyavaharati</foreign>.</note>
in Śrī Puṇḍravardhana province,
when the Ghoṇā-island district falling under it had been obtained
as fief by the great chamberlain Avadhūta,
<supplied reason="explanation">at that time</supplied> the people of the district,
beginning with the great notables and the notables,
together with the council,
were requested by him <supplied reason="explanation">i.e. Avadhūta</supplied>
whose mind was inspired by merits acquired in a previous life:
<note>Cf. the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00076">Jayarampur plate</ref>, line 7: <foreign>sākṣād dharmma ivopāttajanmā</foreign>. Despite the availability of this parallel, the idea of an embodied Dharma does not seem to suit our context.</note></p>
<p n="3-4"><q>I wish to make donation of the village Mastakaśvabhra
along with its citron-grove to a Brahmin,
after purchasing <supplied reason="subaudible">it</supplied> from you,
in accordance with the custom of the district,
for the sake of increasing the merit of my parents and myself,
and after making it a tract of land with copperplate <supplied reason="explanation">deed of purchase</supplied>.</q></p>
<p n="4-10">Having been thus requested <!-- evam-abhyarthitāḥ -->,
they answered <!--pratyuktavantas-->:
<q>We shall deliberate and inform.</q> <!-- samavadya vijñāpayāma Iti-->
On this matter <supplied reason="explanation">yattra</supplied>,
the great notables Ādityadeva, Jayadeva and Jāvabhadra; <!-- mahāmahattarādityadeva-jayadeva-jāvabhad(r)¿o?⟨ā⟩-->
the great notable Śarvadeva; <!-- (ma)hāmahattara-_śarvvadeva-_-->
the hamlet notables Yaśodeva, Praśastarudra and Mitradeva; <!--pāṭaka-mahattara-yaśodeva-_praśastarudra-mittradeva- -->
residing in Bhiloṭa,<note>In translating all the references to the places of residence of the members of council, I have assumed that no significant difference of meaning is conveyed by the choice of terms (<foreign>ni</foreign>)<foreign>vāsin</foreign> or <foreign>vāstavya</foreign> (both rendered as ‘residing in’), while both of these seem also to be synonymous with the use of a nominal derivative in -eya (‘from’)</note><!--
amwb : I copied your note here instead of the end of the list
--> the notable Nātharudra; <!--bhiloṭa-nivāsi-_mahattara_ nātharudra-->
the hamlet notables Śāntirudra and Dharmarudra; <!--_pāṭaka-mahattara-_śāntirudra-dharmmarudra- -->
from Vr̥ddhapriya, the notables Pavitrasoma and Kṣemadeva; <!-- vār(ddhapriye)ya-mahattara-pavittrasoma-kṣemadeva- -->
residing on Ṣaṇḍa-island, the notables Gaurakakiraṇasvāmin and Rudrasvāmin; <!-- ṣaṇḍadvīpa-vāsi-mahattara-gorakakiraṇasvāmi-_rudrasvāmi- -->
residing on Pravara-island, the Brahmin Guhayaśas; <!-- pravaradvīpa-nivāsi-vrāhmaṇa-guyaśa -->
residing in Navadevakula, the notable Śambhusvāmin; <!--navadevakula-nivāsi-mahattara-śambhusvāmi- -->
residing in Pippalivanikā, the notable Bhākideva; <!-- _pippalivanikā-vāstavya-mahattara-bhākideva- -->
from Patravāṭa, the notable Gopasoma; <!-- pāttravāṭeya-mahattara-gopasoma -->
from Śaṅkarapallika, Bhaṭṭadharmasvāmin; <!-- śāṅkarapallikeya-bhaṭṭadharmmasvāmi -->
residing in Śivanagara, Bhadrasvāmin, Śrīcandra and Kṣemaśarman; <!-- _śivanagara-vāstavya-bhadrasvāmi-śrīcandra- -kṣemaśarmma- -->
from Dvīpaki <supplied reason="explanation">the small island</supplied><!-- j'ai corrigé from the island par "from Dvīpaki" : ici on n'a pas dvīpa comme dans les autres noms de lieux en -dvīpa mais dvīpakīya, peut-être "la petite île ou Dvīpaki voir §189 Renou pour la dérivation en aki- dite péjorative -->, the notable Amr̥taśāntanu; <!---dvīpakīya-mahattarāmr̥taśāntanu- -->
residing in<!-- l'expression -vāstavya comme précédemment --> Varāhakoṭṭaka, the notables Dharmakuṇḍa and Śivagupta; <!-- varāhakoṭṭaka-vāstavya-mahattara-dharmmakuṇḍa-_śivagupta- -->
residing in Khātaka, the notable Jalla; <!-- khātaka-nivāsi -mahattara-jalla- -->
from Ardrala, the notables Jālacandra and Śyāmadeva; <!-- _Ārdraleya-mahattara-jālacandra-śyāmadeva- -->
from Audumvarika, the notables Abhinandana and Malayarudra
<supplied reason="subaudible">as well as</supplied> the scribes <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>karaṇika</foreign></supplied> Naradatta, Eḍita/Vāḍita and Devasena; <!-- Audumvarikeya-mahattarābhinandana-_malayarudra-karaṇi-kanaradatta-(E/vā)ḍita-_devasena- -->
the district councilors Śambhudatta, Kr̥ṣṇadatta, Paurudatta, and others, <!-- viṣayādhikaraṇika-śambhudatta- kr̥ṣṇadatta- -po rudattā⟨⟨da⟩⟩yaḥ -->
[then] deliberated. <!-- sa¡n!⟨ṁ⟩mantrayant¿ī?⟨i⟩ -->
</p>
<p n="10-13"> They ascertained <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>avadhr̥tavanto</foreign></supplied> <supplied reason="explanation">the following points</supplied> :<!-- ity avadhr̥tavanto l13 -->
<list rend="numbered">
<item>There is this custom, <!-- māstīyaṁ maryyādā -->
— also <supplied reason="explanation">followed</supplied><!--
amwb : the content of the supplied should be approved by Argr
--> by good people in the past : <!-- pūrvva-sādhubhir apy -->
<q>After being purchased from various people of the district, <!-- u⟨⟨pa⟩⟩krīya nānā-vaiṣ¿ai?⟨a⟩yika-janapadād -->
fields in the surroundings of district villages <!-- viṣaya-grāma-maṇḍala-kṣettrāṇi-->
are donated to <!-- 'tisr̥ṣṭāni -->
<supplied reason="explanation">these</supplied> types <supplied reason="explanation">of recipients</supplied> -temples, monasteries and Brahmins- <!-- devakula-vihāra-brāhmaṇa-viśeṣebhyo --><!--
amwb : translation suggested instead of "donated to temples, monasteries and excellent Brahmins" because I consider viśeṣa in fine compositi a manner to introduce a list of different potential recipients
-->
and in past, <supplied reason="explanation">these transactions</supplied> were ratified by kings; <!-- pūrvva-rājabhiś cānumoditāni -->
yet <!-- amwb : ca line 11 : I suggest translating this "ca" into a "yet" as I feel there is an opposition between the fact that the gift is ratified by the king and that it yields nothing while it lies fallow- -->
the land, as long as it is lying fallow, renders no benefit whatsoever to the king, <!-- śūnyā + bhūmir avatiṣṭhamānā na kaṁ cid apy upakāraṁ rājñaḥ karoty-->
if <supplied reason="explanation">on the other hand</supplied>, it is once again made the object of donation <!-- punar + ddīyamānā-->
in the stated fashion, <!--evaṁ-prakāreṇa -->
it will yield fruit in this world and the next.</q><!-- dr̥ṣṭādr̥ṣṭa-phala-pradā bhavaty --><note>Cf. The <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00064.xml">Panchrol plate</ref>, lines 23–25 (emended): <foreign>cira-khila-śūnyāvaskarāyāṁ bhūmāv avatiṣṭhamānāyāṁ na kāñ cid artha-māttrāṁ rājñaḥ puṣṇāty asya ca rājño dharmma-phala-ṣaḍ-bhāga-prāptir asty eva yato dīyatām iti</foreign>; and the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00003.xml">Ghugrahati plate</ref>, line 13–15 (emended): <foreign>rājño dharmārtha-niṣphalā yā tu bhogyā kr̥tā bhūmir nr̥pasyaivārtha-dharma-kr̥t tad asmai vrāhmaṇāya dīyatām iti</foreign>.</note>
</item>
<item>And this village’s additional taxes <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>uparikara</foreign></supplied> <!-- asya ca grāmasyoparikarā -->
for the coming years <!-- bhāvya{ṁ}-varṣiṇa⟨ḥ⟩ -->
are forty-five <foreign>kārṣāpaṇa</foreign>s. <!-- pañcacatvāriṁśat kārṣāpaṇā --></item>
<item>What other income of the district there will be, <!-- yad anyad v[i]ṣayā-bhāvyaṁ -->
that must be divided and borne by us.<!-- tad asmābhir avacūrṇya voḍhavyaṁ --><note>
On the sense of the word <foreign>ābhāvya</foreign>, see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Furui2011_01"/><citedRange unit="page">150</citedRange></bibl>: “accompanied by all the contributions supposed to go to the royal family (<foreign>rāja-kulābhāvya-sarva-pratyāya-sameta</foreign>)”. It is glossed as ‘income or proceeds’ by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1966_01"/><citedRange unit="page">1</citedRange></bibl>. In the present context, one might wonder if it means income from the district to the king, or separate revenue to be collected and used at district level, because the translation of <foreign>voḍhavya</foreign> depends on this. I settle in favor of the former interpretation by comparing the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00084.xml">Mallasarul plate</ref>, lines 12–13 (emended): <foreign>tat sampadyatām asyābhiprāya ity asmad-vāra-kr̥tair anena dattaka-dīnārān <supplied reason="undefined">saṁgr̥hya</supplied> vīthyāṁ samvibhajyāsmadvettra-garttāgrāme 'ṣṭābhyaḥ kulyavāpebhyo yathocitaṁ dānaṁ tad-vīthī-samudaya eva prāṇāyyaṁ voḍhavyam ity avacūrṇyāṣṭau kulyavāpā mahā-rāja-vijayasenasya dattāḥ</foreign>. See <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1942_01"/><citedRange unit="page">375</citedRange><citedRange unit="note">5</citedRange></bibl>, who explains “<foreign>prāṇāyyaṁ</foreign> = honestly. <foreign>vīthīsamudaye</foreign> = in the revenue, i.e. revenue account, of the <foreign>vīthī</foreign>. <foreign>voḍhavya</foreign> = to be borne. <foreign>dāna</foreign> = <foreign>deya</foreign> = dues. <foreign>avacūrṇya</foreign> = <foreign>apaviñchya</foreign>”.</note>
From what source? <supplied reason="explanation">We do not have any source from which to pay these taxes.</supplied> <!-- kutaḥ -->
</item>
<item>Therefore, on account of the district, we are in need of cash. <!-- yato vayaṁ viṣaya-nimittaṁ hira- ṇy(e)nārthino -->
</item>
<item>And this great chamberlain Avadhūta <!-- ’yaṁ ca mahāpratīhārāvadhūtaḥ -->
humbly requests <!-- prahvo ’bhyarthayati -->
an act that is proper and fruitful for this <supplied reason="explanation">village</supplied>,<!-- yuktam asya sa-phalaṁ (karman ligne suivante)-->
object of <supplied reason="explanation">the present</supplied> report.<!-- vijñāpya-karmmam -->
<note>It is difficult to know how to divide the text into sentences in line 13. I only know one Bengal inscription using <foreign>yuktam</foreign> in a similar context, i.e. the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00064.xml">Panchrol plate</ref>, lines 21–23 (emended): <foreign>etad-dharmma-sahita-vacanām upaśrutyāsmābhir yair uparilikhitakair anyonyāvadhāraṇayāvadhr̥taṁ yuktam ayaṁ prārthayate</foreign>.</note>
</item>
</list></p>
<p n="13-14">And having ascertained <supplied reason="explanation">these points</supplied>, <!-- ’vadhr̥tya ca -->
they have let the district arbitrators<!-- grāhayitvā + viṣaya-vārikai⟨r⟩ --><note>
The term <foreign>viṣayavārika</foreign> is not found elsewhere in early Bengal inscriptions. Ryosuke Furui has recommended me to compare it with the functionaries named <foreign>kulavārika</foreign> and <foreign>vārakr̥ta</foreign>, appointed as arbitrators by the <foreign>adhikaraṇa</foreign> and <foreign>mahattara</foreign>s, in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00081.xml">Faridpur #3</ref>, <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00084.xml">Mallasarul</ref> and <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00003.xml">Ghugrahati</ref> plates. <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_02"/><citedRange unit="page">371</citedRange><citedRange unit="note">5</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">375</citedRange><citedRange unit="note">3</citedRange></bibl> has suggested that <foreign>kulavāra</foreign> possibly means ‘arbitrator’, and that the meaning of <foreign>vārakr̥ta</foreign> seems related.</note>
receive a thousand <foreign>cūrṇikā</foreign>s <!-- cūrṇikā-sahasra(ṁ)-->
as price of the village <!-- grāma-mūlyaṁ -->
as well as incense, flowers and garments <!-- ca gandha-puṣpa-vastrāṇi-->
under the auspicious sign of the constellation of Śravaṇa<note>
In <bibl><ptr target="bib:Griffiths2015_02"/></bibl>, the expression <foreign>śravaṇanimittam</foreign> has been translated by <q>on the occasion of hearing <supplied reason="explanation">of the king’s assent</supplied></q> with the following note : <q>The meaning of the expression <foreign>śravaṇanimittam</foreign> in this context is not clear to me, and I can find no parallels for it in other inscriptions. The phrase <foreign>ājñāśravaṇavidheya</foreign>, frequent e.g. in the Pāla corpus, is translated by <bibl><ptr target="bib:Kielhorn1896-1897_03"/><citedRange unit="page">254</citedRange></bibl> (<ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00088.xml">Khalimpur Plate</ref>, line 55) as ‘ready to obey our commands’.</q>. Here we suggest three other understandings of this expression. The first possibility is to supply an other word instead of the 'king's consent' and to assume it is the hearing of the prescribed <foreign>mantra</foreign>s that must be recited during the gift-ceremony. The second possibility is to translate it as an adverbial accusative in the sense of <q>according to the <foreign>śruti</foreign> <supplied reason="explanation">or Vedic texts</supplied></q> (<bibl><ptr target="bib:MonierWilliams1899_01"/></bibl> : <foreign>nimitta</foreign> <q><foreign>in fine compositi</foreign> caused or occasioned by</q> and <foreign>śravaṇa</foreign> <q>the act of hearing, also 'that which is heard' equals <foreign>śruti</foreign>-</q>). Finally, considering two specific meanings of each member of the coumpound - <foreign>nimitta</foreign> as omen and <foreign>śravaṇa</foreign> as the name of the 20th (or 23rd) <foreign>nakṣatra</foreign> presided over by Viṣṇu -, the expression <foreign>śravaṇanimittam</foreign> could be understand 'under the sign of Śravaṇa' and could express the time during which the transation should be made. In order to choose between these several meanings, one could take a look on the procedure of making gift described in the <title>Agnipurāṇa</title>, chapter 209. The verses 209.49cd-50 mention what the donor and the donee should say. The verses 209.56-63 detail the qualities of the donee, the auspicious place and time for the gift. This latter is defined by the position of the moon and the sun in the sky (<title>Agnipurāṇa</title> 209.57 : <foreign>somārkagrahaṇasaṅkrāntyādau ca kālake</foreign> 'in a darkness <supplied reason="explanation">moment</supplied> as the passage or the eclipse of the moon or the sun etc.'). Finally the verses 209.61-63 quotes the formula which should be recited. And the chapter 209 ends on this sentence : <foreign>anena dānavākyena sarvadānāni vai dadet</foreign> 'One must give all gifts by using this sentence of donation'. As this source belongs to <foreign>smr̥ti</foreign> literature and as the words to be recited are not coming from the Veda, the translation 'in the occasion the hearing of the prescribed <foreign>mantra</foreign>s' could be accepted whereas the one 'according to the <foreign>śruti</foreign>' is less likely. As the verses 209.49cd-50 of the <title>Agnipurāṇa</title> prescribe the time of the gift according to the planet positions, as the <foreign>pāda</foreign> 209.48d specifies that Viṣṇu is the presiding deity of all things given <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>sarveṣāṃ viṣṇudevatā</foreign></supplied>, idea which seems to be shared by others sources and be quoted by several Dharmanibandha authors <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Kane1941_01"/><citedRange unit="book">2.2</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">855</citedRange></bibl></supplied> and finally, as the constellation Śravaṇa is presided over by Viṣṇu, the third translation <q>under the auspicious sign of the constellation of Śravaṇa</q> has been retained here.
</note>
<supplied reason="explanation">and</supplied> they sold the village Mastakaśvabhra, <!-- mastakaśvabhra-grāma(ṁ) vikrītavantas -->
along with its citron grove, <!-- saha (v)ījapūraka-vr̥ndena -->
into the hand of the great chamberlain Avadhūta. <!-- mahāpratīhārāvadhūta-haste --></p>
<p n="14-16">
And after he had bought it, <!-- upakr(ī)ya -->
by him it has been made over to the Brahmin Jayadeva, <!-- tenāpy + vrāhmaṇa-jayadevāya + pratipādito-->
belonging to the Kātyāyana <foreign>gotra</foreign>, <!-- k(ā)ty(ā)yana-sa-gottrāya -->
student of the Vājasaneya <supplied reason="explanation">school of the Yajurveda</supplied>, <!-- vājasaneyasa-vrahmacāriṇe -->
son of Bhogadeva, <!-- bhogadeva-puttrā⟨⟨ya⟩⟩ -->
to be enjoyed in sequence by his sons, grandsons, and so on,
as long as moon and sun shall last, <!-- puttra-pauttrādi-bhogya-krameṇā-candrārkka-kālīnaḥ -->
for purpose of the regular performance of the five great sacrifices.<!-- pañca-mah<unclear>ā</unclear>-yajña-pravarttanāya --></p>
<p n="16-18">And the boundary markers of this village Mastakaśvabhra are, <!--’sya ca mastakaśvabhra-grāmasya sīmā-liṅgāni bhavanti yattra -->
in this connection <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>yatra</foreign></supplied>:
in the East, the stream; in the North, the same, after it has entered the Trighaṭṭikā <supplied reason="explanation">river</supplied> by the cremation ground; <!-- pūrvvasyāṁ diśi srotikā _ Uttarasyām iyam (e)va t¡r̥!⟨ri⟩ghaṭṭikāṁ praviśya śmaśānena -->
in the West, the Omra canal; <!-- paścimasyāṁ diśy omrakhātaḥ -->
in the South, too, along the latter, after the Śr̥ṅgāṭaka <supplied reason="explanation">‘Crossroad’</supplied> pond, the Br̥hacchaṅkajoṭā <supplied reason="explanation">‘Great-Conch-Joṭā’</supplied>; <!-- dakṣiṇasyāṁm apy (e)tad-anulagnena śr̥ṅgāṭaka-villikānusāreṇa vr̥hacchaṅka-joṭā-->
after the latter, down again to the stream near the silk cotton tree of Kāṇālatī. <!-- tad-an(u)sāreṇa kāṇālatīya-śālmalī-samīpena punaḥ srotikā -->
</p>
<p n="18">Engraved by the scribe Śambhudatta, <!-- yāvad iti _ l(i)khitaṁ kāraṇika-śam(bhudatte)na -->
<note>Ryosuke Furui points out to me that <foreign>karaṇika</foreign> here could also be an abbreviation of <foreign>adhikaraṇika</foreign>, if this Śambhudatta is the same as the <foreign>viṣayādhikaraṇika</foreign> of that name who figures in line 9.</note>
heated by the record-keeper Kr̥ṣṇadatta. <!-- tāpitaṁ pusta-pāla-kr̥ṣṇadattena -->
Year 5, Āśvayuja month day 22.</p><!-- samvat· 5 _ Aśva di 20 2 _ -->
<p n="18-19">And Manu and so on used to cite stanzas in this same sense:</p>
<p n="1" rend="stanza">The one who would steal land given by himself or another becomes a worm in excrement and is cooked with his ancestors.<note>
This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 132 among the Bhūmi Stanzas listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.
</note></p>
<p n="2" rend="stanza">The giver of land revels sixty thousand years in heaven; the one who challenges <supplied reason="explanation">a donation</supplied> as well as the one who approves <supplied reason="explanation">of the challenge</supplied> will reside as many <supplied reason="subaudible">years</supplied> in hell.<note>
This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 123 among the Bhūmi Stanzas listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.
</note></p>
<p n="3" rend="stanza">Numerous kings, starting with Sagara, have given land. Whoever holds land at a given moment, to him does the fruit belong.<note>
This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 23 among the Bhūmi Stanzas listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.
</note></p>
<p n="4" rend="stanza">One who gives a carriage or bed obtains a wife; one who gives food <supplied reason="subaudible">obtains</supplied> permanent bliss; one who gives land <supplied reason="subaudible">obtains</supplied> everything <supplied reason="explanation">at once</supplied>; one who gives cattle <supplied reason="subaudible">obtains</supplied> the summit of the sun.<note>
This verse corresponds to the verse numbered 145ab and 145ef among the Bhūmi Stanzas listed by Sircar <supplied reason="explanation">see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sircar1965_03"/><citedRange unit="appendix">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">170-200</citedRange></bibl></supplied>.
</note>
</p>
</div>
</div>
<div type="commentary">
<div type="textpart" n="A"><head xml:lang="eng">Protagonists and date</head>
<p>This plate is the first document that will allow scholars to begin to fill the long gap in early Puṇḍravardhana history between the last <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00056.xml">Damodarpur plate</ref><!--
Il y a 5 Damodarpur plate dans googledoc, quelle est celle à laquelle tu fais référence ici, la 5 je suppose? #1 (47); #2 (48); #3 (32); #4(53); #5(56)
--> (224 GE, i.e. 544 CE) and the first plate of Dharmapāla in the late 8th century.<note>Cf. <bibl><ptr target="bib:Furui2015_01"/><citedRange unit="page">267</citedRange></bibl>: <quote>The political condition of Pupdravardhana after the mid-sixth century is unclear, due to the lack of contemporary sources. It can be surmised retrospectively from the inscriptions of the ninth century that this sub-region also experienced some tendencies witnessed in the other sub-regions.</quote> The inscription nicely confirms Furui’s surmise.</note>
The name of the ruling sovereign (<foreign>mahā-rājādhirāja</foreign>) Pradyumnabandhu was not previously known from any historical sources, as far as I am aware. His name, with suffix <foreign>bandhu</foreign>, seems somewhat unusual for an Indian king, and may be intended as a synonym of Kr̥ṣṇa. It is perhaps no coincidence that the <title>Harivaṁśa</title> and several purāṇic sources situate in Koṭīvarṣa-Bāṇapura, an important site in the religious landscape of ancient Puṇḍravardhana, <quote>a conflict between <hi rend="italic">Śaiva</hi> and <hi rend="italic">Vaiṣṇava</hi> forces, centring around the mythological Bāṇa, the demon king ruling the city</quote> relating <quote>how Kr̥ṣṇa and his companions attack Bāṇa and his demons in this city, in order to rescue the captive Aniruddha, Kr̥ṣṇa’s grandson</quote> (<bibl><ptr target="bib:Bakker2014_01"/><citedRange unit="page">251</citedRange></bibl> and <bibl><ptr target="bib:Yokochi2013_01"/></bibl>). That said, there is nothing in the text of the inscription that obliges us to assume that Pradyumnabandhu’s center of power was in Puṇḍravardhana. His capital may have been elsewhere, as was that of the Gupta kings, and this is perhaps suggested by the fact that his appointee Cellaka is stated to have been serving as governor (<foreign>uparika</foreign>) in this province (<foreign>bhukti</foreign>), still quite in the style of all the locally found inscriptions of the Gupta period. This Cellaka and the great chamberlain (<foreign>mahāpratīhāra</foreign>) named Avadhūta are, just as their sovereign Pradyumnabandhu, entirely unknown from other historical sources.</p>
<p>It is impossible to be any more precise about the date of the present inscription than to say that it most likely dates after the complete dissolution of Gupta power in North Bengal, i.e. after 544 CE, and that it is unlikely, from palaeographic perspective, to be later than 650.
</p>
<!-- Sur les protagnonistes, il pourrait être intéressant de noter que la longue liste des notables cités semble correspondre aux instructions énoncées par Mitramiśra (XVII7). sur Yājñavalkya II.114 (date IV-V) sur la nécessité de la présence des voisins comme garantie et éviter disputes. Il faudra vérifier le texte du Yajna : Olivelle 2019 A treatise of dharma p.169-171 : "sale without ownership"
Veux tu mentionner ici le changement de noms jāvabhad(r)¿o?⟨ā⟩ l5 ? au lieu de Sivabhadra ?-->
</div>
<div type="textpart" n="B"><head xml:lang="eng">Toponyms and landscape indications</head>
<p>The name of the district (<foreign>viṣaya</foreign>), Ghoṇādvīpikā, suggests that Ghoṇā might have been the name of a river, an assumption that could be supported by a passage from the <title>uttarabhāga</title> of the <title>Liṅgapurāṇa</title> that figures several names of Śākta deities at least two of which known to be names of rivers: <q xml:lang="san-Latn">añjanī mohinī māyā vikaṭāṅgī nalī tathā | <hi rend="bold">gaṇḍakī</hi> daḍakī ghoṇā śoṇā <hi rend="bold">satyavatī</hi> tathā ||</q><!-- pas sûre d'avoir fait le bon choix pour la citation en sanskrit -->.
<note><title>Liṅgapurāṇa</title>, <title>uttarabhāga</title>, chapter 27, stanza 158. On the textual history and ritual context of this part of the <title>Liṅgapurāṇa</title>, see <bibl><ptr target="bib:Sanderson2009_01"/><citedRange unit="page">250, 258</citedRange></bibl>. Yuko Yokochi points out to me that <foreign>śoṇā</foreign> might be the river Son, though it is usually denoted by the masculine noun <foreign>śoṇa</foreign>.</note>
However, it is also possible that <foreign>ghoṇā</foreign> here has its lexical meaning of ‘nose’ or ‘beak’, and that we are dealing with a descriptive toponym ‘nose island’, perhaps suggestive of the shape of a formation in the landscape. I am unable to identify the precise location of this, or any of the other principal place names, on a map. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, it must be noted that the village whose donation, ‘along with its citron grove’ (if <foreign>bījapūrakavr̥nda</foreign> is not itself a toponym), is the object of this record is called Mastakaśvabhra, while two place names in -<foreign>śvabhra</foreign> and even a specific name landscape indication <foreign>bījapūraka</foreign>, are also found in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00088.xml">Khalimpur plate of Dharmapāla</ref> (<bibl><ptr target="bib:Kielhorn1896-1897_03"/><citedRange unit="line">30-39</citedRange></bibl>), in the context of a village Krauñcaśvabhra that lay in <foreign>śrīpuṇḍravardhana-bhukty-antaḥpāti-vyāghrataṭī-maṇḍala-sambaddha-mahantāprakāśa-viṣaya</foreign> ‘the district Mahantāprakāśa forming part of the Vyāghrataṭī circle of the Śrī Puṇḍravardhana province’. I do not find toponyms in -<foreign>śvabhra</foreign> in any other inscriptions of Bengal, and hence infer that this element may have been in vogue for forming toponyms only on a local level. Since the find-spot of the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00088.xml">Khalimpur plate</ref> lies within a few miles from the citadel of Gaur (cf. <bibl><ptr target="bib:Bhattasali1935_01"/><citedRange unit="page">76</citedRange></bibl>), there is reason to explore the possibility that the places intended in that plate — as well as ours — lay in the same area.</p>
<p>Landscape indicators or toponyms including the word <foreign>śālmalī</foreign> (here, line 17) are also observed in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00084.xml">Mallasarul</ref> (line 7) and <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00088.xml">Khalimpur</ref> plates (line 37). The element <foreign>joṭā</foreign> (or derivatives), indicating some kind of waterway or canal, is found repeatedly in the cited passage of the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00088.xml">Khalimpur plate</ref>, as also in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00084.xml">Mallasarul</ref> (line 7) and <ref target="DHARMA_INSCBengalCharters00003_insc.xml">Ghughrahati</ref> plates (lines 18–19). The word <foreign>trighaṭṭikā</foreign> (line 17) is also found in <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00080.xml">Faridpur plate #2</ref> (lines 23–24), but Pargiter’s translation ‘three ghats’ does not fit in our context, and it seems Trighaṭṭikā must be a hydronym.</p>
<p>The toponym Audumvarika, which underlies the derivative adjective <foreign>audumvarikeya</foreign> in line 9, may have been the same as the <foreign>viṣaya</foreign> named Audumvarīka in the Vappaghoshavata grant of Jayanāga<!--
Add reference if this inscription integrate the DHARMA BASE
--> (<bibl><ptr target="bib:Barnett1925-1926_01"/><citedRange unit="line">3</citedRange></bibl>). It may further be asked whether Śivanagara (line 7) is identifiable with the aforementioned important <hi rend="italic">Śaiva</hi> site at modern Bāṇgaḍh (<bibl><ptr target="bib:Yokochi2013_01"/></bibl>, <bibl><ptr target="bib:Bakker2014_01"/></bibl>), and whether Varāhakoṭṭaka (line 8) might be connected with the series of Vaiṣṇava<!-- pas d'italique ici dans l'article? --> foundations recorded in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00053.xml">Damodarpur plates #4</ref> and <ref target="DHARMA_INSBengalCharters00056.xml">#5</ref> (<bibl><ptr target="bib:Willis2009_01"/><citedRange unit="page">92-3</citedRange></bibl>). If so, it is necessary to assume that the administrative situation has changed vis-à-vis the Gupta period, when those sites lay in Koṭīvarṣa-district; in our plate, all toponyms mentioned in connection with the notables etc. are explicitly stated to lie within the Ghoṇādvīpa district (lines 2–3).</p><!-- veux-tu signaler plus explicitement les changements de lecture opérés dans le noms de lieu : omrakhātaḥ au lieu de Optra- -->
</div>
</div>
<div type="bibliography">
<p>First edited by Arlo Griffiths. Re-edited here with small improvements based on direct inspection of the plate, in particular the place names Jāvabhadra <supplied reason="explanation">line 5</supplied>, Vr̥ddhapriya <supplied reason="explanation">line 6</supplied> and Omrakhāta <supplied reason="explanation">line 17</supplied>. Therefore, a new translation including these new readings and some other improvments is proposed here by Arlo Griffiths and Amandine Wattelier-Bricout.</p>
<listBibl type="primary">
<bibl n="G"><ptr target="bib:Griffiths2015_02"/><citedRange unit="item">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">27-33</citedRange></bibl>
</listBibl>
<listBibl type="secondary">
<bibl><ptr target="bib:Griffiths2015_02"/><citedRange unit="item">II</citedRange><citedRange unit="page">27-33</citedRange></bibl>
</listBibl>
</div>
</body>
</text>
</TEI>
Commentary
Protagonists and date
This plate is the first document that will allow scholars to begin to fill the long gap in early Puṇḍravardhana history between the last Damodarpur plate (224 GE, i.e. 544 CE) and the first plate of Dharmapāla in the late 8th century.29 The name of the ruling sovereign (mahā-rājādhirāja) Pradyumnabandhu was not previously known from any historical sources, as far as I am aware. His name, with suffix bandhu, seems somewhat unusual for an Indian king, and may be intended as a synonym of Kr̥ṣṇa. It is perhaps no coincidence that the Harivaṁśa and several purāṇic sources situate in Koṭīvarṣa-Bāṇapura, an important site in the religious landscape of ancient Puṇḍravardhana, “a conflict between Śaiva and Vaiṣṇava forces, centring around the mythological Bāṇa, the demon king ruling the city” relating “how Kr̥ṣṇa and his companions attack Bāṇa and his demons in this city, in order to rescue the captive Aniruddha, Kr̥ṣṇa’s grandson” (Bakker 2014, p. 251 and Yokochi 2013). That said, there is nothing in the text of the inscription that obliges us to assume that Pradyumnabandhu’s center of power was in Puṇḍravardhana. His capital may have been elsewhere, as was that of the Gupta kings, and this is perhaps suggested by the fact that his appointee Cellaka is stated to have been serving as governor (uparika) in this province (bhukti), still quite in the style of all the locally found inscriptions of the Gupta period. This Cellaka and the great chamberlain (mahāpratīhāra) named Avadhūta are, just as their sovereign Pradyumnabandhu, entirely unknown from other historical sources.
It is impossible to be any more precise about the date of the present inscription than to say that it most likely dates after the complete dissolution of Gupta power in North Bengal, i.e. after 544 CE, and that it is unlikely, from palaeographic perspective, to be later than 650.
Toponyms and landscape indications
The name of the district (viṣaya), Ghoṇādvīpikā, suggests that Ghoṇā might have been the name of a river, an assumption that could be supported by a passage from the uttarabhāga of the Liṅgapurāṇa that figures several names of Śākta deities at least two of which known to be names of rivers: “añjanī mohinī māyā vikaṭāṅgī nalī tathā | gaṇḍakī daḍakī ghoṇā śoṇā satyavatī tathā ||”. 30 However, it is also possible that ghoṇā here has its lexical meaning of ‘nose’ or ‘beak’, and that we are dealing with a descriptive toponym ‘nose island’, perhaps suggestive of the shape of a formation in the landscape. I am unable to identify the precise location of this, or any of the other principal place names, on a map.
Nevertheless, it must be noted that the village whose donation, ‘along with its citron grove’ (if bījapūrakavr̥nda is not itself a toponym), is the object of this record is called Mastakaśvabhra, while two place names in -śvabhra and even a specific name landscape indication bījapūraka, are also found in the Khalimpur plate of Dharmapāla (Kielhorn 1896–1897, ll. 30-39), in the context of a village Krauñcaśvabhra that lay in śrīpuṇḍravardhana-bhukty-antaḥpāti-vyāghrataṭī-maṇḍala-sambaddha-mahantāprakāśa-viṣaya ‘the district Mahantāprakāśa forming part of the Vyāghrataṭī circle of the Śrī Puṇḍravardhana province’. I do not find toponyms in -śvabhra in any other inscriptions of Bengal, and hence infer that this element may have been in vogue for forming toponyms only on a local level. Since the find-spot of the Khalimpur plate lies within a few miles from the citadel of Gaur (cf. Bhattasali 1935, p. 76), there is reason to explore the possibility that the places intended in that plate — as well as ours — lay in the same area.
Landscape indicators or toponyms including the word śālmalī (here, line 17) are also observed in the Mallasarul (line 7) and Khalimpur plates (line 37). The element joṭā (or derivatives), indicating some kind of waterway or canal, is found repeatedly in the cited passage of the Khalimpur plate, as also in the Mallasarul (line 7) and Ghughrahati plates (lines 18–19). The word trighaṭṭikā (line 17) is also found in Faridpur plate #2 (lines 23–24), but Pargiter’s translation ‘three ghats’ does not fit in our context, and it seems Trighaṭṭikā must be a hydronym.
The toponym Audumvarika, which underlies the derivative adjective audumvarikeya in line 9, may have been the same as the viṣaya named Audumvarīka in the Vappaghoshavata grant of Jayanāga (Barnett 1925–1926, l. 3). It may further be asked whether Śivanagara (line 7) is identifiable with the aforementioned important Śaiva site at modern Bāṇgaḍh (Yokochi 2013, Bakker 2014), and whether Varāhakoṭṭaka (line 8) might be connected with the series of Vaiṣṇava foundations recorded in the Damodarpur plates #4 and #5 (Willis 2009, pp. 92–3). If so, it is necessary to assume that the administrative situation has changed vis-à-vis the Gupta period, when those sites lay in Koṭīvarṣa-district; in our plate, all toponyms mentioned in connection with the notables etc. are explicitly stated to lie within the Ghoṇādvīpa district (lines 2–3).