Indian Epigraphy c11.t6: 3. Preamble

Indian Epigraphy c11.t6

Language: English

3. Preamble

c11.t6.1

Generally a charter opens with a *mangala* or auspicious invocation.² Early records³ often begin with the auspicious word *siddham* which means the same thing as *siddhir=astu*, ‘Let there be success.’⁴ Sometimes the word *svasti* was used instead of *siddham*.⁵ Later on, *siddham* began to be expressed by a symbol⁶ which was often followed by the word *svasti*.⁷ Medieval records sometimes show *Om* at the beginning generally along with the *siddham* symbol and other invocatory passages.⁸

c11.t6.2

² Before this, some early copper-plate grants, especially of certain South Indian royal families (e. g. the Vākāṭakas, Pallavas, etc.), have the word *dṛṣṭam* (Prakrit *diṭhaṃ* or *diṭṭhaṃ*) meaning, ‘[It has been] seen’, to indicate that the original of the document on the plates had been examined by the proper authorities who found it allright. See *Select Inscriptions*, pp. 406, 412, 419, 433, 357, etc. In some early medieval charters of East India, e. g. those of the Pālas, the letter *ni* is found about the beginning or the end of the first line of writing or at its both ends. See *Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XV, p. 295, note 4; Vol. XXIX, pp. 2, 9, 49. This letter may be taken to be an abbreviation of *nibaddha* meaning ‘registered’, or, as we have seen, *nirīkṣita* which means ‘seen’ or ‘approved’ exactly as the word *dṛṣṭa* found in a similar position in certain South Indian grants referred to above. See *JAS, Letters*, Vol. XX, pp. 216-17. Cf. also above, pp. 92 ff., p. 125, note 4; below, pp. 149-50.

c11.t6.3

³ See, e. g., *Ep. Ind.*, Vol. I, p. 5; Vol. XXVI, p. 151; etc.

c11.t6.4

⁴ The antiquity of the use of this word is proved by Patañjali’s *Mahābhāṣya* on the first *vārttika* (*siddhe śabd-ārtha-sambandhe*) of Kātyāyana on Pāṇini’s *Aṣṭādhyāyī*. Patañjali says that Kātyāyana employs the word *siddha* at the very outset for the auspicious completion of his scientific treatise. See Chhabra, *loc. cit.*

c11.t6.5

⁵ See, e. g., *Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XVII, p. 336.

c11.t6.6

⁶ Al-Birūnī is wrong in stating that the symbol stands for the *Praṇava* or the auspicious sound *Om* (Sachau, *Alberuni’s India*, Part I, p. 173). The mistake is clear from its use by the Buddhists who had no regards for the *Praṇava* (cf. *Proc. IHC*, 1939, pp. 471 ff.; above, pp. 92-93, 95).

c11.t6.7

⁷ See, e. g., ibid., Vol. XXVI, p. 317; Vol. XXVII, p. 199. Sometimes we have *siddhiḥ* instead of *svasti* (ibid., Vol. XII, p. 323).

c11.t6.8

⁸ Cf. ibid., Vol. XV, p. 282 (symbol followed by *Om namaḥ Śivāya*, etc.).

c11.t6.9

Gradually the invocation became more and more elaborate, and it ran from mere symbols and words to more or less big sections in prose and verse in praise of the favourite deities of the grantors or the writers of the document. Thus the charters of the Early Western Gaṅgas begin with the symbol denoting *siddham*, followed by a passage hailing the god Viṣṇu in the words: *jitaṃ bhagavatā gata-ghana-gagan-ābhena Padmanābhena*.¹ A still more elaborate type of invocation is illustrated by records like the Rewah plates of Trailokyamalla, which begin with *Oṃ namaḥ Śivāya Gaṇapataye namaḥ*, followed by three invocatory verses, the first in praise of the god Kṛṣṇa, the second of the god Śiva and the third of the goddess Sarasvatī.² Sometimes the same stanza is found in many records of the same family or area³ and such a verse may be borrowed from a well-known work.⁴ In the charters of some dynasties, e. g., the Pālas of Bengal and Bihar and the Imperial Gaṅgas of Orissa, an invocatory stanza as well as the genealogy of the donor in verse was copied by him from his predecessors' grants. As in the case of most dynasties, this invocatory verse refers to the deity worshipped by the donor's family. But in charters like those of the Early Kadambas of Banavasi, the different grants of the same ruler often begin with invocation to different deities. In such cases, the deity referred to in the invocation seems to have been worshipped by the particular scribe who drafted a charter.⁵

c11.t6.10

¹ See, e. g., the Sasanakota plates of Mādhavavarman I (ibid., Vol. XXIV, pp. 234 ff.).

c11.t6.11

² Ibid., Vol. XXV, p. 5.

c11.t6.12

³ The verse *Labhate sarva-kāryeṣu pūjayā gaṇanāyakaḥ | vighnaṃ nighnan=sa vaḥ pāyād=apāyād=Gaṇanāyakaḥ ||* in praise of Gaṇanāyaka is found in most of the grants of the Śilāhāras of the Northern Konkan as well as some other rulers of the same region. See, e. g., *Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XXV, p. 55; Vol. XXXII, p. 66, text lines 1-2; p. 74, text lines 1-2; etc.

c11.t6.13

⁴ The verse *Caturmukha-mukh-āmbhja-vana-haṃsa-vadhūr=mama | mānase ramatāṃ nityaṃ sarva-śuklā Sarasvatī ||* in praise of Sarasvatī is quoted from Daṇḍin's *Kāvyādarśa* (cf. ibid., Vol. XXV, p. 5) while the stanza *Namas=tuṅga-śiraś-cumbi-candra-cāmara-cārave | trailokya-nagar-ārambha-mūla-stambhāya Śambhave ||* in praise of Śambhu, quoted from the *maṅgala* in Bāṇa's *Harṣacarita*, is found in numerous epigraphs especially from South India (cf., e. g., *Ind. Ant.*, Vol. XIII, p. 92).

c11.t6.14

⁵ See *Suc. Sāt. L. Dec.* pp. 260, 265, etc.

c11.t6.15

The name of the place, from which a grant was issued, was sometimes mentioned after the *maṅgala* or invocation. Charters were generally issued from the capital of the donor and, in such cases, the place of issue was often omitted as it was taken for granted. Sometimes the place of issue happens to be a royal camp, either in the course of a military expedition or of a pilgrimage, and it was specifically mentioned in the charter.¹ In some cases, the place of issue is mentioned in connection with the donor’s name, either before or after it, and not immediately after the *maṅgala* or invocation at the beginning of a document.²

c11.t6.16

¹ See Bāṇa’s *Kādambarī*, N. S. Press, p. 225, for the issue of grants by kings while on their marches. The Banaras copper-plate grant of Kalacuri Karna (Bhandarkar’s List, No. 1223) was issued when he was on a pilgrimage at Prayāga in connection with his father’s annual *Śrāddha* ceremony.

c11.t6.17

² Cf. the *siddham* symbol followed by *svasti Valabhitaḥ* at the beginning of the Bhamodra-Mohota plate of Maitraka Droṇasiṃha and Gahilū-grāma-samāvāse in line 15 of the Mahoba plates of Candella Paramardin (*Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XVI, p. 18 and p. 12); also *śrī-Vikramapura-samāvāsita-śrīmaj-jaya-skandhāvārāt* before the king’s name in the prose passage after the versified introduction in the records of the kings of Bengal (iibid Vol. XXXIII, p. 139. text lines 17-18).

c11.t6.18

As in the case of invocation, so too in mentioning the place of issue, we have in later records sometimes an elaborate description of the city or camp instead of a mere mention of its name. Thus, while the Sasanakota plates³ of the early Western Gaṅga king Mādhavavarman I omit this item altogether, the Prince of Wales Museum plates⁴ of Gurjara Dadda III have merely : ‘from the prosperous [city of] Bharukaccha’ without any embellishment and the Chittagong plate⁵ of Kāntideva has only: ‘from the glorious and victorious campresidence at the city of Vardhamāna.’ Similarly, Mādhavavarman’s Ipur plates⁶ have : ‘from the victorious camp [pitched] at Kuḍavāḍa’, after the donor’s name and not after the *maṅgala* or invocation. An elaborate mention of the place of issue is illustrated by records like the Sonepur plates of the Somavaṁśī king Mahābhavagupta I Janamejaya of South Kosala, in which the invocation is followed by a long prose passage in nine lines of writing, describing the city of Ārāma.¹

c11.t6.19

³ Ibid. Vol. XXIV, p. 238.

c11.t6.20

⁴ Cf. ibid., Vol. XXVII, pp. 197 ff.

c11.t6.21

⁵ Ibid., Vol. XXVI, p. 317.

c11.t6.22

⁶ Ibid., Vol. XVIII, p. 336.

c11.t6.23

¹ *Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XXIII, p. 250.

c11.t6.24

The mention of the name of the donor in the preamble of a grant is an important source of historical information. In the earlier charters, only the name of the donor is mentioned, with or without a royal title, and occasionally the name of his father and, in some cases, also of his grandfather are mentioned in his description. In certain early records like those of the Sātavāhanas, the king is mentioned only with a metronymic like Gautami-putra indicating his birth from a lady born in a family belonging to a particular gotra.²

c11.t6.25

² See *Select Inscriptions*, pp. 191ff. This was apparently done to distinguish the ruler in question from his namesakes as well as his step-brothers born of his father's other queens. For the absence of *gotra-antara* (the change of the wife's *gotra* to that of her husband) in some forms of ancient Indian marriage, see *Proc. IHC*, 1945, pp. 48 ff.

c11.t6.26

The above bare outline gradually expanded into elaborate genealogies and strings of epithets in later records. We have often racy and ornate descriptions, in prose or verse or in a mixture of both, in the introduction of the donor, which cover a considerable part of his charter. The military exploits of the donor and his ancestors received special attention of the court poets who composed the said section called praśasti or eulogy and often attributed vague and imaginary achievements to the personages described. Physical charms and qualities of head and heart, sometimes real but often imaginary, were generally made the subjects of description. Thus while the Sātavāhana charters usually introduce the king's name with a metronymic but with or without any royal epithet, eleven out of the twenty four lines of writing on the Sasanakota plates, referred to above, are devoted to the introduction of the donor. After the invocation, the Jāhnaveya family and the Kāṇvāyana gotra, to which king Mādhavavarman I claimed to have belonged, and his father Koṅgaṇivarman are gradually introduced. This is followed by the donor's own name, the intervening spaces being filled up with epithets describing the father and the son. Some of these epithets are of little importance to the student of history, e. g. when the father is described as ‘one who has produced lands [inhabited by] good people by the conquests born of the impetuosity of his own arms.’ The description of king Kāntideva and his parents in the Chittagong plate consists of six ornate verses followed by a prose passage, while Dadda’s charter describes in ornate prose, in about 14 lines out of a total of about 30, not only his father or parents, but also some of his distant ancestors.

c11.t6.27

The charters of imperial dynasties like the Eastern Gaṅga, Kalacuri, Rāṣṭrakūṭa, Coḷa, Cālukya, Paramāra and Pāla, contain an elaborate genealogical description in connection with the introduction of the donor. Thus the Asankhali plates¹ (1303 A. D.) of Gaṅga Narasimha II of Orissa have 212 lines of writing, 165 of which are covered by an elaborate genealogical description introducing the donor. It consists of 105 stanzas in various metres and a passage in prose between verses 6 and 7. Of the many ancestors mentioned (some of whom are mythical or imaginary), the achievements of 10 beginning with Vajrahasta III (1038-70 A. D.) are specially dealt with. The same introductory section is not only found in the other charters of the same king, but the verses are mostly copied from the grants of his ancestors.² The real grant begins in line 165 with the word *svasti*. The introductory composition of this nature was often kept ready for adding the grant portion at a later date. We have several copper-plate grants with only the introductory portion engraved on them.³ Important historical information is generally scattered here and there in these descriptions which are, as indicated above, in most part full of vague praises for the king and his ancestors. Records like those of the imperial branch of the Eastern Gaṅga dynasty of Orissa give the duration of the different kings’ rules in years in round numbers¹ while those of the Eastern Cālukya kings give it more accurately sometimes mentioning months and days.²

c11.t6.28

¹ *Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XXXI, pp. 109 ff.

c11.t6.29

² The stanzas describing the end of the rule of the donor's predecessor and those dealing with the donor himself were newly composed and added to those found in the charters of the predecessor.

c11.t6.30

³ See, e. g., the Chittagong plate of Kāntideva and the Kedarpur plate of Śrīcandra (*Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XXVI, pp. 313 ff; Vol. XVII, pp. 188 ff.) which illustrate the practice of keeping such blanks in readiness in the office.

c11.t6.31

¹ See *Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XXVIII, pp. 249 ff.

c11.t6.32

² *SII*, Vol. I, pp. 53 ff.

c11.t6.33

The order in respect of a grant was often addressed to subordinates and officials as well as to the inhabitants of the area where the donated land or village was situated. In early charters sometimes the item is altogether absent or only the governor or the villagers are addressed in respect of the grants.³ But the list of state officials is generally more or less lengthy in some of the later records especially of Northern India. Such big lists often include subordinate rulers, fief-holders, officers of the revenue department as well as those of the police, the judiciary and the military department and some members of the royal household.

c11.t6.34

³ Cf. *Select Inscriptions*, pp. 445 ff., 456 ff., 433 ff., 458 ff. See also Appendix below, pp. 161 ff.

c11.t6.35

While issuing the order in respect of a grant, the king often shows the courtesy of greeting the addressees and enquiring after their welfare. The expressions indicating the command is generally *samādiśati* or *ādiśati*; but sometimes other words like *bodhayati*, *mānayati*, *kuśalayati*, etc., are added to it. According to the legal etiquette of those days, the donor is usually described as *kuśalin*, ‘in good health’. The implication is that the donation was made when the donor was in his full senses and was not under the influence of any disease or intoxicant and that therefore the deed issued in favour of the donee should have to be recognised as a valid document.

c11.t6.36

The item of address is absent in charters like the Sasanakota plates referred to above and the Parbatiya plates⁴ of king Vanamālavarman of Assam, who flourished in the 9th century A.D. The Ipur plates contain an address only to the residents of the village granted and the expressions *kuśalī* and *viditam=astu vaḥ* are missing in the record. The persons addressed in Dadda’s grant include the subordinate rulers and chiefs and the donor’s own officers, but not the villagers. In certain Śātavāhana and Early Pallava records, the order is issued to the governor of the district in which the gift land was situated.¹ The above-mentioned Chittagong plate of Kāntideva has: ‘the illustrious Kāntideva, being in good health, informs the future kings of the Harikelā maṇḍala as follows, for their own good: “Be it known to you”.’ Passages like *viditam=astu vaḥ*, *viditam=astu bhavatām*, *astu vaḥ saṃviditam*, *matam=astu bhavatām*, etc., calling attention to the notification that follows immediately, are of frequent occurrence.² In the Svalpavelura grant of the Gaṅga king Anantavarman,³ the fairly long list of officers is headed by the Brāhmaṇas and the expressions used are: ‘being in good health, duly honours and commands’, while the Baripada Museum plate of Devānanda⁴ has: ‘duly honours, intimates to, enquires after the health of, and commands’. The persons addressed in these cases include both officials and villagers.

c11.t6.37

⁴ *Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XXIX, pp. 145 ff.

c11.t6.38

¹ See, e.g., *Select Inscriptions*, pp. 191 ff., 193 ff., 433 ff., etc.

c11.t6.39

² Some times, *c=ānyat*, ‘and another thing’, intervenes between *samājñāpayati* and *viditam=astu* (cf. *Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XXVI, p. 204, text lines 17-18).

c11.t6.40

³ *Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XXIV, p. 135.

c11.t6.41

⁴ Ibid., Vol. XXVI, p. 79.

c11.t6.42

A very long list of officials and non-officials addressed by the donor in connection with a grant is found in the early medieval charters of some parts of Northern and Eastern India such as those issued by the Pāla and Sena kings of Bengal and Bihar. Thus the Anulia plate⁵ of Lakṣmaṇasena has twenty-five entries in the list while the Bangadh plate⁶ of Mahīpāla I has no less than fortyfour including those of peoples like Gauḍa, Mālava, Khasa, Hūṇa, etc., who were probably mercenaries in the Pāla army, not to mention certain other classes including the Brāhmaṇas, Medas, Andhras and Caṇḍālas.⁷

c11.t6.43

⁵ N. G. Majumdar, *Ins. Beng.*, Vol. III, pp. 86-87.

c11.t6.44

⁶ A. K. Maitreya, *Gauḍalekhamālā*, pp. 96-97.

c11.t6.45

⁷ The officials and others referred to in the Pāla records are: *rājan* (subordinate king); *rājanyaka* (subordinate chief); *rājaputra* (possibly, nobleman); *rājāmātya* (minister or executive officer); *mahāsāndhivigrahika* (minister for peace and war); *mahākṣapaṭalika* (accountant and record-keeper); *mahāsāmanta* (feudatory); *mahāsenāpati* (general); *mahāpratihāra* (officer in charge of palace-gates, etc.); *mahākārtākṛtika*; *dauḥsādhasādhanika* (emergency officer); *mahādaṇḍanāyaka* (commander, etc.); *mahākumāramātya* (minister of the rank of a prince of the royal blood); *rājasthān-oparika* (viceroy); *dāśāparā-*

Linked texts (5)

Aṣṭādhyāyī — Pāṇini, Sanskrit
Kāvyādarśa — Daṇḍin, Sanskrit
Harṣacarita — Bāṇabhaṭṭa, Sanskrit
Kādambarī — Bāṇabhaṭṭa, Sanskrit
Chittagong Plate of Kāntideva — Sanskrit