|
The Indian Analyst
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA possibly means one enjoying a free holding. Pustakapāla was the record-keeper. The word kūṭakōlasa is difficult to explain. The village is said to have been granted together with the uddēśa (space above the ground called tala), with subjects such as the weavers, gōkūṭa (milkmen, called Gaüra in Oriyā) and śauṇḍika (vintners) and with gulmakas (outposts) at the khēṭa (village or hamlet), ghaṭṭa (harbour) and nadītarasthāna (ferry). Another interesting passage says that the grant was made a-lēkhanī-praveśatayā bhūmichchhidra-pidhāna-nyāyēna. The expression a-lēkhanī-pravēśatayā seems to mean that the grant would never in future have to be the subject of another document. That is to say that the village could not be regranted to any other family and that its ownership could not be transferred by the donee to some other family. In inscriptions we usually find the expression bhūmichchhidra-nyāya. This nyāya was based on the custom according to which a person who brought a piece of fallow or jungle land under cultivation for the first time was allowed to enjoy it as a rent-free holding.[1] The word chhidra in this case no doubt refers to the furrowing of the land. But the idea of chhidra-pidhāna or ‘ covering a hole ’ seems to have developed out of a misunderstanding of the original meaning of the nyāya.[2] The idea in bhūmi-chchhidra-pidhāna-nyāya was probably that the loss of lands owing to various causes was thought to be compensated for by making free gifts of some of them. It may, however, also mean the custom relating to the reclamation of follow land.
Of the geographical names mentioned in the charter, the location of Dakshiṇa-Tōsalā (i.e., ºTōsalī) and Yamagartā-maṇḍala has already been discussed. Guhēśvarapāṭaka, the capital of the Bhauma-Kara kings, was probably modern Jājpur or a locality in its suburbs. Tamura vishaya, Pachhama (Paśchima) khaṇḍa, Sāntīragrāma and Kōmyōsaṅga cannot be satisfactorily identified. The headquarters of Tamura may, however, be located at modern Tamur (21º18″ N. 85º14″ E.) in the former Pal-Lahara State.[3] In regard to the name of the khaṇḍa, it may be pointed out that one of the Gañjām plates of Daṇḍimahādēvī records the grant of a village in the Pūrva khaṇḍa of the Varadākhaṇḍa vishaya in the Kōṅgōda maṇḍala. This seems to suggest that the Pūrva and Paśchima khaṇḍas were merely the eastern and western divisions of a vishaya. Dharmapāṭṭi the native village of the donee, cannot be identified ; but Ṭakārī, where his family originally lived, is known from numerous other records as a great seat of learned Brāhmaṇas. It was variously called Tarkārī, Tarkārikā, Tarkāra, Ṭakkāra, Ṭakārī and Ṭakkārikā.[4] Sometimes[5] it is said to have been situated in the Madhyadēśa division of India, which comprised, roughly speaking, the present Uttar Pradesh with the eastern part of the Panjab, although sometimes Bihar and North Bengal were included in the division. In one record[6] the village is specifically described as situated within the limits of Śrāvastī. There is, however, difference of opinion as regards the location of this Śrāvastī. Some scholars favour its identification with Setmahet on the borders of the Gonda and Bahraich Districts of the Uttar Pradesh while others suggest its location about the Bogra District in North Bengal. But usually the former identification is supported by scholars and the village of Ṭakārī is located in Oudh.[7] _________________________________________________
[1] See Jolly, Hindu Law and Custom (trans. by B. K. Ghosh), pp. 196-97. Note that the hunted deer belonged
to him who hit it first. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|