North Indian Inscriptions

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS

in Epigraphia Indica, Vol. XXVI, pp. 135 ff., where, however, he gives neither the text nor the translation of the inscription, but proclaims the spuriousness of the plate.¹

       The Plate, which is inscribed on one side only, measures about 10½" by 9". The inscription had already suffered considerably in lines 4-6, and particularly in line 7 in the effacement of letters when it was examined, but after chemical treatment these lines, and especially line 7, developed actual perforations. The record has thus been in a much damaged condition. Nevertheless, the text can be restored to a large extent by a reference to the Gayā plate of the same monarch as far as the place where the details of the donee and the place-names begin. No seal was found along with the plate, but it is not unlikely that it was attached to that portion of the proper right side which is now broken, that is, near the commencement of lines 7-8, as in the case of the Gayā plate. The weight of the plate, as it is, is 45 tolas. The average size of letter is ½". The characters belong to the eastern variety of the Gupta alphabet such as is represented by the Allahābād Pillar Inscription, the test letters being m, s, h and so forth. They include in line 10, forms of the numerical symbols for 5 and 2. The language is Sanskrit; and the inscription is in prose throughout. In respect of orthography, we have to notice (1) the doubling of t throughout, in conjunction with a following r, e.g. in prapauttrasya, line 3, -dauhittrasya, line 4; -pittrōr=, line 6,=ttraividyasya, line 8, and so on; (2) the doubling of consonants following r e.g, in sarvva, line 1, ⁰mēdh-āharttur=, line 3, and so forth; (3) the occasional use of b for v, Viditam=bō, line 6, saṁbat, line 10; (4) the use of v for b, in mahavalā-dhikṛita, line 11; and (5) the use of upadhmānīya in such cases as utpannah =parama, line 4 and ch=aitāh=prabhṛiti, line 8-9.

       The inscription is one of Mahārājādhirāja Samudragupta of the Imperial Gupta dynasty; and the charter recorded in it is issued from his camp situated at Ānandapura. It is dated, in numerical symbols, in the year 5 on the second (solar) day of the month Māgha. It is a non-sectarian inscription; the object of it being to record the grant of two villages to a Brāhmaṇa Jayabhaṭṭisvāmin by name, styled Traividya in subsequent lines. The grant was written at the orders of Gōpasvāmin, the Akshapṭalādhikṛita, Mahāpīlūpati and Mahābalādhi-kṛita. At the end occurs the name of the prince (kumāra) Chandragupta, apparently as Dūta, as stated by us long ago in the List of Inscriptions of Northern India.

       There is another plate of Samudragupta, namely, that found at Gayā,² which agrees with the present one as far as the genealogical portion is concerned. Whatever remarks Fleet passes in regard to the former applies to the latter also. Thus in regard to the Gayā Plate Fleet says: “The inscription itself, however, is undoubtedly spurious. This is shown conclusively, if by nothing else, by the fact that from uchchhēttuḥ, line 1, to dauhittrasya, line 5. the epithets of Samudragupta are uniformly in the genitive case; the drafter of the inscription was copying from a grant Chandragupta II or some other descendant of Samudragupta; he only then recognised that this construction would not suit a supposed inscription of Samudragupta himself, which was required in accordance with the seal that was to be attachd; and he promptly thus adopted the nominative construction, utpannaḥ. . . . Samudraguptaḥ, without taking the trouble to correct the preceding the passages.”³ Fleet’s criticism was not quite unjustifiable, because the palaeography and the general appearance of the Gayā Plate pointed to the beginning of the eighth century A.D. as being its reasonable age. Such is not, however, the case with the present grant, which according to its palaeography “shows Gupta forms throughout”,⁴
__________________

¹ Dr. Sircar cites the indiscriminate use of v and b as one of the reasons for its spuriousness. [Contra., see Dr. G.S.Gai’s article in JGJRI., Vol. VI, p. 308–Ed.].
² See inscription No. 4, below.
³ CII.,Vol. III, 1888, p. 255.
⁴ Ep. Ind.,Vol. XXV, p. 50.