Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Age of the Imperial Guptas c6: Chapter II

The Age of the Imperial Guptas c6

Language
English

Contents

Chapter II

c6.1

THE SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION AND PEERAGE.

c6.2

Immediately after the fall of the Kuṣāṇa empire the system of administration and the bureaucracy underwent a great change. In the Benares inscription of the third year of Kāniṣka I we are introduced to a Viceroy and a Governor who were most probably in charge of the North-eastern provinces of the Scythian empire. The Viceroy was styled *Mahākṣatrapa* and the Governor *Kṣatrapa*. This inscription, therefore, proves that the Scythians had changed the names of the great officers after their conquest of India. The Maurya bureaucracy, a glimpse of which is to be obtained in the *Artha-śāstra* of Kauṭilya, was therefore changed, at least to some extent. It was not changed entirely because nearly fourteen centuries after the fall of the Maurya empire *Mahāmātras* continued to be appointed in Magadha. In the 12th century A.D., a *Mahāmātra* named Ḍallahāpiccha dedicated an image of a Bodhisatva in Bihar town.¹ Therefore, it is evident, that either the Maurya official designations had survived to a certain extent till the Musalman conquest of the country or that it had been revived by some later kings. It may have remained in force in popular vocabulary because in the Maratha country a police officer is still called a *Faujdār*. In the inscriptions of the Gupta emperors there is no trace of the retention of the old Maurya official terms. In the earliest inscriptions of the Gupta dynasty, the Gayā plate of the reign of Samudragupta, of G.E., 9 we come across a new series of officials. The charter was written according to the orders of an *Akṣapaṭal-ādhikṛta*. In subsequent inscriptions we become quite familiar with a class of officials called *Akṣapaṭalikas* or *Mahākṣapaṭalikas*, but this is the first time that we hear of this class of officials in Epigraphy. The Gayā grant is a very short record but it has supplied us with a new term which has not attracted the attention of scholars up to this time. This is the word *Valat-kausham*. The translator of the record recognised it as a technical official term but was not able to offer any explanation. The existence of a new class of village officials, who had to be addressed on the occasion of a transfer of land, is very interesting. In the Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudragupta one does not expect details about the system of government of the new kingdom because it is a *praśasti*, written in the *kāvya* style in praise of the king. But in 1.24 divisions of territory, unknown to us from previous inscriptions, are mentioned. Here for the first time in Indian history we hear of the term *bhukti*, which corresponds to a modern Commissioner’s division in British India, consisting of several districts, and the *viṣaya* which corresponds to the Mughal *Cāklā* or the British district. The officials mentioned in the Allahabad pillar inscription are also new to us. The composer of the inscription, Hariṣeṇa, was a *Kumārāmātya*, a *Sāndhi-vigrahika* and a *Mahādaṇḍanāyaka* and a son of the *Mahādaṇḍanāyaka* Dhruvabhūti. The superintendence of the incision of the record was entrusted to another *Mahādaṇḍanāyaka* named Tilabhaṭṭaka. The Allahabad pillar inscription therefore contains the titles of three new classes of officials :—

c6.3

¹ T. Bloch : *Supplementary catalogue of the Archæological collections in the Indian Museum, Calcutta, 1910, p. 35, No. 3794.*

c6.4

(1) *Kumārāmātya*, (2) *Mahādaṇḍanāyakā*¹ and (3) *Sandhivigrahika*.

c6.5

¹ This title was known in the Kuṣaṇa empire; cf. Lala *Daṇḍa-nāyaka* of the Mankiala inscription of the year 18 of Kāṇiṣka I—*Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society*, 1909, pp. 666.

c6.6.1

The term *Kumārāmātya* has been literally translated as “Princes’ Minister.”² But a little comparative study shows that this translation is untenable: because whatever its original meaning might have been, in the beginning of the 4th century A.D. it had acquired a new significance. In the first place we find that even the highest ministers were *Kumārāmātyas*. The Brāhmaṇa Śikharasvāmin, who was the minister (*Mantrin*) of Candragupta II and his son Pṛthiviṣeṇa, who was the minister of Kumāragupta I, were both *Kumārā*- mātyas.¹ During the reign of Kumāragupta I, the governor of the district of Koṭivarṣa was a Kumārāmātya named Vetravarman.² At some time during the rule of the Gupta emperors in Eastern Bengal a Kumārāmātya had been appointed Governor of the Suvvuṅga viṣaya, but his descendants continued to use the seal of the office of the Kumārāmātya even after attaining independence and a later descendant used this seal even in the 8th century.³ The seals discovered by the late Dr. T. Bloch throw a very brilliant flood of light on the bureaucracy of the Gupta empire, and especially on the different classifications in the ranks of Kumārāmātyas. Bloch discovered only three specimens of seals of ordinary Kumārāmātyas. On these seals the figure of Lakṣmī, standing inside a lotus-pond, attended by two dwarfs holding objects, which look like moneybags, occupies the upper halves. The legend on these seals is simply Kumārāmāty-ādhikaraṇasya. Dr.

c6.6.2

Vogel’s brilliant suggestion now enables us to translate it as “(The seal) of the office of the Kumārāmātya.”⁴ At the same place 28 seals were discovered of the next higher class of Kumārāmātyas. They were equal in rank to the Yuvarāja, or a prince of the royal family. The term pādīya was not translated by Dr. Vogel; it means “equal to.” Pāda is used often in the same sense as *kalpa*. *Guru-pāda* is the same as *guru-kalpa* and means “one equal in rank to a preceptor.” There is some difficulty in translating the word *Yuvarāja*, because in the next class of *Kumārāmātyas* we find the use of the term *Yuvarāja-bhaṭṭāraka*. Evidently there were two different classes of *Yuvarājas*. Ordinarily *Yuvarāja* means a heir-apparent, but the use of *Bhaṭṭāraka* along with *Yuvarāja* distinctly indicates two different classes. As there can be only one heir-apparent in a kingdom or empire, such a distinction can only mean that the younger princes of the royal family had also come to be styled *Yuvarājas*, while the real heir-apparent was styled *Yuvarāja-bhaṭṭāraka*. It is evident, therefore, that some of the *Kumārāmātyas* were held to be equal in rank to princes of the blood royal like the princes of the Roman Empire or even the Holy Roman Empire.

c6.6.3

The legends on these seals is *Yuvarāja-pādīya-Kumārāmāty-ādhikaraṇasya*, “(the seal) of the office of the *Kumārāmātya* equal in rank to a prince.” The legend of the third class of *Kumārāmātyas* indicates that officers of this rank were held to be equal to the heir to the empire. Twelve specimens of seals of official of this class were discovered. In the seals of the second class we find the figure of Lakṣmī with an elephant on each side, but without any attendant.¹ In third class we see Lakṣmī with the elephants and two dwarfs holding round pots from which they are pouring out small objects, evidently coins.¹ The legends on the seals of the third class is *Śrī-Yuvarāja-bhaṭṭāraka-pādīya-Kumārāmātya-ādhikaraṇasya*. “(The seal) of the office of the *Kumārāmātya*, equal in rank to the illustrious heir-apparent.” In the fourth or the last class of *Kumārāmātyas* the legends make a startling revelation. Only one specimen of this particular kind was discovered by Bloch at Vaiśālī. The legend runs: *Śrī-paramabhaṭṭāraka-pādīya-Kumārāmātyādhikaraṇasya*; “(The seal) of the office of the *Kumārāmātya*, equal in rank to His Majesty (the Emperor).”² Up to this time officials of the state equal in rank to the sovereign have not been met with in ancient or modern histories. There are other officials equal in rank to the heir-apparent but none except the *Kumārāmātyas* were sufficiently high in rank to be equal to His Majesty the Emperor.

c6.6.4

The Commander-in-chief was held to be equal in rank to the heir-apparent. Only one specimen of a seal of this particular type was discovered at Vaiśālī. On this we see a vase or *kalaśa* in the centre, a conch to the right and the letter *Śrī* to the left. The legend thereon is *Śrī-Yuvarāja-bhaṭṭāraka-pādīya-bal-ādhikaraṇasya*: “(the seal) of the office of the Commander-in-chief, equal in rank to the heir-apparent.”³

c6.7

² *Annual Report of the Arch. Survey of India*, 1903-04, Part II, p. 197 No. 3.

c6.8

¹ Epi. Ind. Vol. X pp. 71-72.

c6.9

² Ibid., Vol. XV. pp. 130-133.

c6.10

³ Ibid., pp. 306-12.

c6.11

⁴ Annual report of the Archæological Survey of India, 1903-4, p. 107, Note 1.

c6.12

¹ *Ibid.*, No. 2.

c6.13

¹ *Ibid.*, No. 6.

c6.14

² *Ibid.*, p. 108, No. 8.

c6.15

³ *Ibid.*, No. 12.

c6.16

Among the higher class of officials the *Uparikas* were appointed Viceroys of the provinces. Bloch discovered two seals of the *Uparika* of Tirabhukti or Tirhut. The legend is *Tirabhukty=Uparik-ādhi-karaṇasya*. “(The seal) of the office of the *Uparika* of Tirabhukti.” The importance of the ranks of the *Uparikas* was not understood till the discovery of the Damodarpur plates. From these inscriptions we learn that the *Uparikas* were viceroys of provinces. In G.E. 124, during the reign of Kumāragupta I an *Uparika* named Cirātadatta was governing the *Bhukti* of Puṇḍravarddhana.¹ He was also in charge of the same province, *i.e.*, Northern Bengal, in G.E. 129.² In G.E. 163, during the reign of the Emperor Budhagupta, an *Uparika* with the title of *Mahārāja* was the Viceroy of Northern Bengal.³ At some other time during the reign of the same Emperor another *Uparika* with the title of *Mahārāja* named Jayadatta was the Viceroy of the same province.⁴ We can say now that the seals discovered by Bloch at Vaiśālī were those of the Viceroys of Tirabhukti or North Bihar.

c6.17

¹ *Epi. Ind.* Vol. XV, p. 130.

c6.18

² *Ibid.*, p. 133.

c6.19

³ *Ibid.*, p. 136.

c6.20

⁴ *Ibid.*, p. 138.

c6.21

Among the minor officials of the Gupta Empire, the Vaiśālī seals have made us familiar with many. The most noteworthy among them was an official in charge of the morals of the province of Tirabhukti. Only one specimen of the seal of this official was discovered by Bloch. The legend is *Tirabhuktau Vinaya-sthiti-sthāpak-ādhikaraṇa-*.

c6.22

sya. “(The seal) of the office of the Controller of morals in Tirabhukti.” Bloch suggested rightly that this Controller of Morals was an official corresponding to the Censor of Public Morals (*Dharma-Mahāmātras*) of Aśoka. The existence of such an official in the fourth and fifth centuries A.D. is extremely interesting, but the construction of the legend is rather difficult. It cannot be understood for what reasons two almost similar terms, *sthiti* and *sthāpaka*, were used in the case of the designation of one and the same officer. It may only mean that the Controller of Morals was “the founder of the permanence of Morals in Tirabhukti.”¹ Among minor offices may be mentioned that of the officer-in-charge of Military Stores, corresponding to the modern Master-General of Stores; *Śrī-raṇa-bhāṇḍāgār-ādhikaraṇasya*.² The office of the Chief of Police had also a separate seal; *Daṇḍa-pāś-ādhikaraṇasya*.³ It appears that the name Tira-bhukti was originally used separated. *Bhukti* denotes a Division and the original name of Northern Bihar was Tira and not the compound Tira-bhukti, as in modern times, from which Tirhut has been derived. On the seal of the *Kumārāmātya* in charge of the *viṣaya* of Tira the original name is used; *Tira-Kumārāmāty-ādhi-karaṇasya*.⁴ Seals appear to have been used in documents in the place of signatures. This can be proved by the large number of inscriptions on the same lump of clay in the case of agreements. In one or two cases names of officials occur along with their designations on seals. Vinayaśūra was the Chief Prefect of Police and held the rank of a *Taravara* in addition; *Mahāpartīhāra-Taravara-Vinayaśūrasya*.¹ Agnigupta was the principal judge; (*Mahādaṇḍanāyaka*).² Yakṣavatsa was the Commandant of the irregular cavalry; *Bhaṭ=āśvapati Yakṣavatsasya*.³

c6.23

¹ *Annual Report of the Archæological Survey of India, 1903-4, p. 109, No. 21.*

c6.24

² *Ibid., p. 108, No. 13.*

c6.25

³ *Ibid., No. 14.*

c6.26

⁴ *Ibid., p. 109, No. 22.*

c6.27

¹ *Ibid.*, No. 16.

c6.28

² *Ibid.*, p. 109, No. 17; but see ante p. 69.

c6.29

³ *Ibid.*, No. 18.

c6.30

The system of administration has been made clear to us to some extent by the discovery of the Damodarpur plates. Under the Viceroy Cirātadatta of Puṇḍravardhana there was a *Kumārāmātya* in each district or *Viṣaya*. Vetravarman was the officer-in-charge of the district of Koṭivarṣa in G.E. 124 and 129. But in 163, under the Viceroy Brahmadatta, no minor official is mentioned as officer-in-charge of the same district. In the same reign under the Viceroy Jayadatta an officer with the rank of *Āyuktaka* named Śagaṇḍaka was the officer-in-charge of this district.⁴ The *Āyuktakas* are familiar to us as *Tad-āyuktakas* and *Viniyutakas* in medieval copper plates. One seal of a class of similar officials styled Prāyuktakas was discovered at Vaiśālī. Ordinarily the officer-in-charge of a district was styled *Viṣaya-pati*. In the year G.E. 224, during the reign of the Emperor Bhānugupta, when Rājaputradeva was the viceroy of Northern Bengal, a Viṣaya-pati named Svayambhu-deva was the officer-in-charge of the district of Koṭi-varṣa.¹ In G.E. 146 a Viṣayapati named Śarva-nāga was the officer-in-charge of the *Antarvedī* or the country between the Ganges and the Jumna.² In G.E. 165 a viceroy, with the title of *Mahārāja*, named Suraśmi-candra was governing that part of Central India which lies between the Jumna and the Narmadā. The actual term used is Kālindī for the Jumna and this may mean the Kali-Sindh.³ Under Suraśmi-candra there was another official with the same title named Māṭṛ-viṣṇu, who was probably the governor of Eastern Malava or the district of Airakiṇa or Eran in the Sagar district. Finally there was Parṇadatta, Skandagupta’s viceroy of Kathiawad, in whose time the dam of the great Sudarśana Lake was again rebuilt, but the Junagadh inscription does not provide us with the rank and titles of this officer. In the Gupta inscriptions we find that each province was divided into a number of revenue divisions called *Viṣayas*. The later sub-division of a province into *Maṇḍalas* and each *maṇḍala* into different *viṣayas* is yet not known. Therefore the term *viṣaya* has been translated as a district and not as a *parganah*.

c6.31

⁴ *Ibid.*, p. 138.

c6.32

¹ *Ibid.*, p. 142.

c6.33

² *Gupta Inscriptions*, p. 70.

c6.34

³ *Ibid.*, p. 89.

c6.35

The Damodarpur plates throw strong light on the administration of the districts. Five different classes of officials are mentioned in four of them as being associated in the government of a district. In the plate dated G.E. 124 we find mention of the *Nagara-śreṣṭhin* Dhṛtipāla, the *Sārtthavāha* Bandhumitra, the *Prathama-kulika* Dhṛtimitra, *Prathama-kāyastha* Śāmbapāla and three *Pustapālas* named Ṛṣidatta, Jayanandin and Vibhudatta. Among these the *Nagara-śreṣṭhin* still survives in Gujarat. The *Prathama-Kulika* was evidently the president of the corporation of bankers. On the analogy of the Faridpur plates of the time of Dharmāditya and Goparāja it may be stated that the *Prathama-kāyastha* was the same as the *Jyeṣṭha-kāyastha*. It is impossible to ascertain whether this post was elective or not. Most probably this officer was the head clerk of the district office. The *Sārthavāha* was a caravān-leader and we have met with the name in Kuṣāṇa inscriptions. From the existence of a large number of seals bearing the legend *Sreṣṭhi-Sārthavāha-Kulika-Nigama* discovered at Vaiśālī we may imagine that the *Sārthavāhas* mentioned in the Damodarpur plates was the Chief of the Caravan-leaders. The *Pustapālas* are new to us and were met with for the first time in the Faridpur plates. Their principal duties appear to have been the valuation of land. In the Faridpur plates only one *Pustapāla* is mentioned in each case but in the case of the Damodarpur plates we find three of them acting as a board. In the plate dated G.E. 129 the same officers, elective or appointed, are mentioned. Things are different in the plate of G.E. 163 of the reign of Budhagupta. In this case officers are not mentioned in detail but simply as the eight chief officials, such as the *Mahattara*, etc. One *Pustapāla*, only named Patradāsa, is mentioned. The officials mentioned in the second Damodarpur plate of the reign of the Emperor Budhagupta mentions Ṛbhupāla as the *Nagara-śreṣṭhin*, Vasumitra as the Caravan-leader, Varadatta as the Principal Banker or *Prathama-kulika* and Viprapāla as the Head clerk or *Prathama-Kāyastha*. In this case also we find a board consisting of three *Pustapālas*, Viṣṇudatta, Vijayanandin and Sthāṇunandin measuring out the land. In the next generation, in G.E. 224, during the reign of the Emperor Bhānugupta we find Ṛbhupāla still alive and still holding the post of the *Nagara-śreṣṭhin*. The officials mentioned are the same. The *Nagara-śreṣṭhin* Ṛbhupāla, the *Sārthavāha* Sthāṇudatta, the *Prathama-kulika* Matidatta and the *Prathma-Kāyastha* Skandapāla. In this case also there was a board consisting of Naranandin, Gopadatta and Bhaṭanandin but they are called *Prathama-Pustapālas*.

c6.36

The Damodarpur plates throw interesting light on the conditions prevailing in Northern Bengal from the middle of the 5th to that of the 6th century A.D. The inscriptions on them are not merely grants of land and therefore they are slightly different from the later copper plate grants. They are really deeds of transfer of property. In the case of the earliest of them we find that in G.E. 124= 443-4 A.D. a Brāhmaṇa named Karpaṭika applied for a gift of some untilled land at the same time promising to pay the price at the rate of three Dīnāras or gold coins as the price of each Kulya-vāpa. One Kulyavāpa of land was given by the charter engraved on this plate according to this application. The translator of this inscription states that the land was given to him after the payment of the money. So also, in G.E. 129= 448-9 A.D. some one, whose name cannot be read at present, applied for a similar grant of land and five Droṇa measures were sold to him on receipt of the money. The first applicant Karpaṭika wanted the land for the performance of Agnihotras and the unknown applicant of the second plate wanted the land for the performance of the five great sacrifices (Mahāyajñas). In the case of the third plate a village head man (Grāmika) named Nābhaka applied for the sale of some land to settle some distinguished Brāhmaṇas. Upon the recommendation of the Pustapāla, Patradāsa, on the receipt of the money from the hands of Nābhaka and after inspection by village officials, one Kulyavāpa of uncultivated (Khila) land, measuring eight by nine Nalas, was sold to him. In this case three other men named Sthāyapāla, Kapila and Śrībhadra are mentioned but the decay of the inscription did not permit the learned decipherer to connect them with the rest of the narrative. In the fourth plate from Damodarpur, which also belongs to the reign of Budhagupta, an application is made by the *Nagara-śreṣṭhin* Ṛbhupāla for the sale of some habitable land for building two temples and two store rooms. In his application Ṛbhupāla states that “ in the village of Doṅgā, in Himavac-chikhara (the summit of the Himalayas) I have formerly given four *Kulya-vāpas* of land to the god Kokāmukha-svāmin and seven *Kulyavāpas* to the god Śveta-Varāha-svāmin. Now in the neighbourhood of these cultivated pieces of land I wish to build two temples with store-houses for these two gods.” The application was granted and some building-land sold to the *Nagara-śreṣṭhin* when it had been reported by a board of three *Pustapālas* that eleven *Kulyavāpas* of land had been actually given by the former to these two gods. We learn from the fifth plate that a nobleman (*Kula-putra*) of Ayodhyā named Amṛtadeva applied for the sale of some uncultivated land for being converted into a religious trust for the repairs to and the supply of necessaries of the worship of the god Śveta-Varāha svāmin in the temple in the forest in this locality. According to this application five *Kulyavāpas* of land were sold to the applicant after taking fifteen *Dināras* from him. These five *Kulyavāpas* consisted of uncultivated fields along with building-lands (*vāstu*). In this case the inscription records that the land was given to the god Śveta-Varāha-svāmin. Therefore, the fifth Damodarpur plate is not merely a deed of transfer land by the State to a private individual but a grant of land to a god as well.

c6.37

In the third, and fifth plates from Damodarpur it is stated in the report of the *Pustapālas* that “the land may be given for the increase of the merit of His Majesty the King (*Paramabhaṭṭāraka-Mahārāja-pādena puṇyopacayāya*). Unfortunately the seal has been preserved in the case of the fifth plate only and on this we find the legend *Koṭivarṣ-ādhiṣṭhān-ādhikaraṇasya*; “(the seal) of the office of the administration of Koṭivarṣa.” We may compare with this the seal on the Faridpur plates, *Vāraka-maṇḍal-ādhikaraṇasya*; “(the seal) of the office of the *maṇḍala* of Vāraka.” The seal as well as the form of the inscription prove that neither the Damodarpur plates nor the Faridpur plates are Royal or Imperial grants of land. They are simply deeds of transfer of land issued by local officials in distant parts of the Empire and were transactions in which the Imperial Secretariat took no part. It cannot be understood how their Majesties Budhagupta and Bhānugupta acquired merit by selling uncultivated lands after taking the proper price.

c6.38.1

The deeds of transfers of land on the Damodarpur plates brings us to another interesting subject, ordinary civil contracts. The seals discovered by Bloch at Vaisali contain 274 specimens bearing the legend, *Śreṣṭhi-Sārtthavāha-Kulika-Nigama*, which was correctly translated by the discoverer as “the corporation of bankers, traders (*and*) merchants.” These seals are found in combination with two, three or even four others. In these cases the same lump of clay bears two three or even four impressions. The word *Nigama* means a corporation or guild and the name is to be found as early as the first century B.C. on Guild-tokens described by Cunningham.¹ But in the Nasik cave inscription of the year 42 and 45 the terms used for guilds are *Śreṇī* and *Nikāya*. It should be noticed that the same inscription also contains the word *Nigama-sabhā* which was been translated by Senart as "the town's hall."² In the case of a Bharhut inscription Lüders translates the same term as a town.³ But it is extremely difficult even to conceive a town of merchants, traders and bankers only. *Nigama-sabhā* seems to have corresponded to the Guild-Halls of Modern Europe. The interest attached to the seals of this corporation of merchants, traders and bankers lies principally in their occurrence jointly with seals of other officials and private persons. In the majority of cases one separate seal contains an invocation to some deity;

c6.38.2

"Victorious be the lord Ananta with the goddess Ambā," "victory to god" "adoration to Paśupati" or "adoration to him." On the same lump, on which the seal of the Corporation and the seal bearing the invocation are to be found, we find other seals bearing the names of officials and one or more private persons. One such lump bears on it the seal of the office of a *Kumārāmātya* equal in rank to the younger princes. In many cases the names of more than one person are to be found on one and the same lump of clay. The seals of Mātr̥dāsa and Satyāśrita are to be found on the same seal on which are to be seen the invocation, *namastasmai*, and the seal of the Corporation of merchants, traders and bankers. That such guilds were not confined to Vaiśālī or Tirabhukti is proved by the discovery of a seal with an almost similar legend at Bhita in the Allahabad district. In the case of the Bhita seal the legend was wrongly translated by Dr. Vogel, who regarded the term *Kulika* as “a special tribe employed as captains of mercenaries.”¹ On this Spooner very pertinently observed, “the expressions ‘Bankers, traders and merchants’ is a homogeneous and consistent compound; ‘Bankers, traders and captains’ of mercenaries would seem to involve an incongruity.”² From a distance of fifteen centuries it is very difficult to understand what this combined corporation of bankers, traders and merchants was.

c6.38.3

After the destruction of all guilds and corporations in Northern India during six centuries of Musalman rule it is not possible even to guess what they were like. It is not possible even to apply the analogy of such institutions in Gujarat where some such have survived. In old cities like Ahmadabad there are guilds and its office-bearers. The *Nagara-śreṣṭhin* of Ahmadabad is still called *Nagar-seth* but the rank is now hereditary according to Prof. A. B. Dhruva, Pro-Vice-chancellor of the Benares Hindu University, who is an inhabitant of that city. According to the same authority Gujarat guilds are now styled *Mahajans*. The *Nagara-śreṣṭhin* of a city like Vaiśālī was probably the president and the chief executive officer of the great corporation. Under this great corporation there were three separate guilds for Bankers, traders and merchants. The seals discovered at Vaiśālī by Spooner prove that there was at least one separate guild of *Śreṣṭhins* or Merchants in that city, while Marshall’s Bhita finds prove the existence of a separate guild of *Kulikas*. The term *Kulika* is perhaps better suited for translation as bankers than the term *Śreṣṭhin*. Spooner discovered several seals of the *Śreṣṭhi-nigama*,¹ at Vaiśālī and he observes that “it is noticeable that this seal is never impressed alone;

c6.38.4

some personal seal impression always accompanies it.” The seals discovered by Bloch and Spooner at Vaiśālī contain the seals of a number of Chief *Kulikas* such as *Prathama-Kulik-Ograsiṅha* and *Prathama-Kulika-Hariḥ*.² The existence of *Prathama-Kulikas* at Koṭivarṣa in Northern Bengal and at Vaiśālī proves that this office was also a regular institution in North-eastern India if not in the whole of Northern India. The distinction between a *Prathama-* *Kulika* and ordinary *Kulikas* is evident and many of seals of ordinary *Kulikas* were discovered at Vaiśālī. With regards to the *Sārthavāhas* we do not possess any evidence of the existence of any guild or organisation. Spooner discovered an unique seal of another *Nigama* but he could not read the legend definitely. According to him it reads *Makkupali-Nigamasya*.¹

c6.39

¹ Cunningham: *Coins of Ancient India*, p. 63, pl. III 8-9.

c6.40

² *Epi. Ind.* Vol. VIII, pp. 82-3.

c6.41

³ *Ibid.*, Vol. X, App. p. 67 No. 705.

c6.42

¹ *Annual Report of the Archæological Survey of India, 1911-12*, p. 56, No. 55.

c6.43

² *Ibid.*, 1913-14, p. 108.

c6.44

¹ *Ibid.*, pp. 125, No. 8 B ; 137 No. 270A ; 150, No. 648 ; 153, No. 804.

c6.45

² *Ibid.*, p. 139, No. 277 A ; 1903-4, p. 117, Nos. 99-160.

c6.46

¹ *Ibid.*, 1913-14, p. 127 No. 64A.

c6.47

Sir Aurel Stein has proved from his discoveries in Central Asia that the Ancient Indian envelope consisted of two boards tied together with a string or wire, to the knot of which a lump of clay was attached. The seal of the person sending a letter was attached or impressed to this lump of clay. The fact that the majority of seals discovered were fired proves that in the majority of cases the binding material of Ancient Indian envelopes was something that would not burn when the clay seal was fired.

c6.48

Lumps of clay bearing two or even three impressions of seals of private persons may mean a joint petition to some officer of Vaiśālī, but when we find that the seal of the great Corporation of Bankers, traders and merchants affixed to the same lump of clay with the seal of the office of a *Kumārāmātya* equal in rank to a prince of the blood-royal what are we to conclude except that it was the seal attached to a contract between these people and the great *Kumārāmātya*?² The small chamber in which Bloch discovered the seals is generally considered to be either the record room of the royal offices at Vaiśālī or the lumber room of some office. Therefore it may be taken that seals with the impression of the great corporation along with those of one or more private persons are really seals attached to petitions addressed to some officials, but in my opinion such an explanation is untenable because there can hardly be any necessity for a great guild to apply jointly with private persons, specially in cases where such persons were members of the great Corporation or a subordinate guild. It appears to me that lumps bearing the impression of the seal of the great Corporation of Bankers, merchants and traders, an invocation and one or more private seals are really seals attached to contracts between one or more parties. Let us take for example 15 specimens of the seal of Prakāśanandin, out of which two were found combined with that of the office of the provincial government of Vaiśālī : Vaiśāly=adhiṣṭhān=ādhikaraṇaḥ. There cannot be any other explanation of this seal save and except that it was a contract between Prakāśanandin and the government which was brought and deposited in the government record office or was thrown away when the contract was no longer subsisting.¹ It cannot be imagined that the office of the government of Vaiśālī sent a petition jointly with a private person named Prakāśanandin to some higher officials. Let us take another example. Out of 27 seals of a private person named Nāgasiṁha, one is combined with the seal of the Corporation of Bankers, traders and merchants and another private person named Bhavasena. In this case also it appears that the seal was attached to a private contract to which the great Corporation was a party and which was brought to the government record office for registration. Arrangements for registration by governments in Ancient India, in ages later than the Gupta period, are far too numerous. We have therefore to admit that out of 274 specimens of the seal of the great Corporation of Bankers, traders and merchants at least 254 were attached to contracts brought to the government office of Vaiśālī for registration and safe custody.

c6.49

² *Ibid.*, 1903-4, p. 110, No. 29.

c6.50

¹ Ibid., p. 117, No. 96.

c6.51

In the Gupta period, as well as earlier periods, according to the discoveries of Spooner at Vaiśālī, clay was the ordinary material used for sealing. Such seals were used both for covers of contracts as well as of letters. In the case of documents intended for permanent record copper or silver was used. Instances of copper seals are those attached to the Gaya plate of Samudragupta of G.E. 9 = 328-9 A.D., the seal of the government of the district of Koṭivarṣa and that of the maṇḍala of Vāraka from Faridpur.¹ The only instance known to us in which silver was used for sealing is that of the great seal of Kumāragupta II discovered at Ṣaiyadpur-Bhitari in the Ghazipur district of the U.P. Bloch described the clay seals and the method of sealing in the following words;—"From the shape of the clay pieces it is evident that they were attached to letters or other literary documents, and that they served to hold together the string which was tied around the wooden boards upon which the letter was written, or which were used as a sort of envelope. In that case either birch-bark or palm-leaf took the place of our modern paper. Fig. 18 gives a view of the reverse of one of the clay lumps. The method adopted for sealing letters at this time seems to have been to press down the ends of the string tied round the boards into a piece of moist clay by means of some instrument, perhaps the broad side of a knife. Evidence of this is the groove which invariably occurs on the back of all the seals. Generally a few thin lines run across its centre. They must have been made by the blunt edge of the knife to press down the strings more deeply, in order to make them adhere tighter to the clay. The other side of the clay bears the impression of the sender's seal. In many cases traces remains of the finger-marks of the persons who handled the seals while moist. As the majority consisted of pieces of unbaked clay, it is clear that it was considered sufficient to allow the seal to dry during the transit of the letter. A few pieces are of a light yellow colour, and look as if the seal had been heated a little before despatching the letter. The present find thus distinguishes itself sharply from other collections of clay seals made at various ancient Indian sites, which as a rule consist of votive tablets, either put down as offerings near holy shrines or taken away as memorials by pilgrims. The reverse of the latter is invariably quite smooth, and the groove and stringholes seen on all the Basarh seals are entirely wanting."¹

c6.52

¹ Ind. Ant. Vol. XXXIX, 1910, pp. 193-205, pl. II.

c6.53

¹ Annual Report of the Archæological Survey of India, 1903-4, pp. 101-2.

c6.54

The emblems used on these seals is extremely interesting. Garuḍa, the vehicle of Viṣṇu was the emblem or Lāñchana of the Imperial Gupta family. This will be seen in the upper part of the silver seal of Kumāragupta II and that attached to the Gayā plate of Samudragupta. Fleet regarded the seal as genuine but thought that the inscription on the plate was forged.² Evidently the ladies of the Imperial house did not use the emblem of the Gupta family because on the seal of the Great Queen Dhruvasvāminī discovered by Bloch at Vaiśālī we find a seated lion facing right above the legend. On this seal Dhruvadevī or Dhruva-svāminī is called "the wife of the Mahārājādhirāja, the illustrious Candragupta, the mother of the Mahārāja, the illustrious Govindagupta." In the case of the official seals the figure of Lakṣmī predominates. In the case of the four different classes of Kumārāmātyas the standing figure of Lākṣmī with or without attendants is always present. But in the case of the Commander-in-chief, equal in rank to the Heir-apparent, the place of Lakṣmī is taken by a vase. On the seal of the office of the Master-General of Military Stores the figure of Lakṣmī attended by elephants and dwarfs once more occupy the central space. The private seals of officials do not bear the official lāñchana; symbols of the Sun and Moon on that of Vinayaśūra, a humped bull couchant in the case of the judge Agnigupta and a boar and a conch with the symbols of the Sun and Moon on that of Yakṣavatsa. In the case of provincial officials Lakṣmī with elephants and dwarfs appear on the seals of the more important offices; the seal of the viceroy or Uparika of Tirabhukti, the Censor of Public Morals of the same province and that of the Kumārāmātya of the province. But the lāñchana is quite different in the case of the office of the government of (the city of) Vaiśālī where we find a hemispherical object, "perhaps money-chest," and that of the office of the district (viṣaya) of Vaiśālī in which case we get a wheel with symbols of the Sun and the Moon. Spooner discovered a seal of the office of a court of law with the legend Dharmmāsan-ādhikaraṇasya in which case the lāñchana is a tall vase.¹ Among the few official seals discovered by Spooner the most important is the unique seal of a new class of Kumārāmātyas. The legend is Vaiśālī-nāma-kuṇḍe Kumārāmāty-ādhikaraṇasya; but it is impossible to translate it because we do not know what nāma-kuṇḍe exactly means.¹ In this case we find Lakṣmī with elephants. It appears therefore that while Garuḍa, the vehicle of the god Viṣṇu, was the lāñchana of the Gupta Imperial family, Lakṣmī, the consort of that god, was the emblem of the Imperial offices. The lower provincial officials were not allowed to use it.

c6.55

² Gupta Inscriptions, pl. XXXVII.

c6.56

¹ Annual Report of the Archæological Survey of India, 1913-14, pp. 127-8, No. 69 A.

c6.57

¹ Ibid., p. 136, No. 200.

c6.58

Inscriptions and seals indicate that in some cases at any rate ministers were hereditary. In the case of Amātyas we have Spooner’s seal from Vaiśālī in which we see that the Amātya Hastabala was the son of the Amātya Bhadrika.² In the reign of Candragupta II Vīrasena alias Śaba of Pāṭaliputra calls himself the hereditary minister as well as the minister of peace and war (Anvaya-prāpta-Sācivyo-vyāpṛita-Sāndhivigrahaḥ) in the Udaygiri cave inscription.³ The most important case of hereditary succession to offices is recorded in the Karamdanda inscription of G.E. 117=446-7 A.D. We learn from this record that the Kumārāmātya Śikhara-svāmin, a brāhmaṇa of the Aśva-vājī gotra, was the minister (Mantrin) of Candragupta II. But his son, the Kumārāmātya Pṛthivīṣeṇa was at first the Mantrin of the Emperor Kumāragupta I but later on he became the Commander-in-chief (Mahābalādhikṛta).⁴

c6.59

² Ibid., No. 210.

c6.60

³ Gupta Inscriptions, p. 35.

c6.61

⁴ Epi. Ind., Vol. X, pp. 71-2.

c6.62

Very little reliable data is available about the land revenue system of the early Gupta Empire. Literary evidence is altogether absent. The only sources of information are the inscriptions on copper plates of the period discovered at Dhanaidaha in the Rajshahi district and at Damodarpur in the Dinajpur district of Bengal. From the Damodarpur plates we learn that in the Puṇḍravardhana *bhukti* there was much fallow or waste land. The division of land is into (1) *Nāla* (cultivated), (2) *Khila* (fallow, waste), and (3) *Vāstu* (homestead). Applications were made for the sale of such waste lands for religious purposes. In the Damodarpur plate of G.E. 124 such waste land is called *Apradā* and *Aprahata*. These terms have been translated by the learned decipherer as "as yet unploughed and not already given." The term *Aprahata* cannot be translated as "not already given." The natural meaning is "that which is not barred in the case of transfer." So also *Apradā* means "unproductive." The Second term is used once more in the second plate of G.E. 129. Prof. Basak translates it "land of which no previous gift (*pradā*) has been made. In the light of the expression *apradā-dharmeṇa* in plate No. 5 (in the place of *Nīvī-dharmeṇa*) the phrase *apradā-kshaya* may here be explained, as in the case of *nīvī-dharma-kshaya*, thus—land could not, unless so conditioned, be alienated or transferred without state-permission, after being once sold for the purpose of a gift to a Brāhmaṇa or a god. We might equally well read the phrase as *aprad-āksh*- aya.”¹ To me it seems that *apradā-dharma* should be taken to be “the law or rules governing unproductive lands.” All over the United provinces special rules and regulations govern the transfer and the income from such lands, called *Nuzul*. *Apradā kṣaya* should mean the disposal of unproductive lands. From the fifth Damodarpur plate we learn that there was a large amount of forest-land in the Koṭivarṣa district of the Puṇḍravardhana Division, because in his application Amṛtadeva, the nobleman of Ayodhyā, states that the temple of the god Śveta-Varāha-svāmin was situated “in this forest.”²

c6.63

¹ *Ibid.*, Vol. XV, p. 134, Note 1.

c6.64

² *Ibid.*, p. 143.

c6.65

Marshall’s Bhita excavations yielded some very important seals. Those belonging to the Gupta period support the conclusions stated above. The official seals bear the *lāñchana* of the Gupta Empire, Lakṣmī attended by elephants and dwarfs. The best specimen is that of the office of the ordinary *Kumārāmātya*.³ The seal of the office of the district of Sāmāharṣa is also similar, (*Sāmāharṣa-viṣay=ādhikaraṇasya*).⁴ In one respect some of the seals from Bhita show a deviation from the ordinary class of Imperial official seals from Vaiśālī. In these specimens the name of a higher official is mentioned, *Mahāśvapati-Mahādaṇḍanāyaka-Viṣṇurakṣita-pādānugṛhita-Kumārāmātya=adhikaraṇasya*. The real import of the term *pādānu-* gṛhīta could not be understood in 1911-12. The Damodarpur plates have familiarised us with similar terms. Thus during the reign of Kumāragupta I the Uparika Cirātadatta was appointed viceroy of Puṇḍravardhana and the term used is *tat-pāda-parigṛhīte* “was accepted by His Majesty’s feet” in the plates of G.E. 124 and 129. A similar term is used in the case of Budhagupta’s viceroy for the same province, Brahmadatta, in the plate of G.E. 163 as well as in the case of Jayadatta in the undated plate of the time of the same Emperor. An exactly similar term is used in the plate of Rājaputradeva in the plate of G.E. 224 of the reign of Bhānugupta. Shorn of its elegance, the phrase simply means “(The seal) of the office of the *Kumārāmātya* appointed by the Cavalry-leader and general Viṣṇurakṣita.”¹ In this case it is more reasonable to translate the term *Daṇḍanāyaka* as a general; *lit.* leader (*nāyaka*) of an army (*daṇḍa*). In the second instance of this class the legend is incomplete on account of breakage; it can be restored as *Mahārāja-Śaṅkarasiṃha-[pādānugṛhita-Yuvarāja]-padīy-Āyuktak=ādhikaraṇasya*, “(The seal), of the office of the Āyuktaka, equal in rank to a prince, appointed by Mahārāja Śaṅkarasiṃha.” The space in the second line indicates that this officer had some other rank in addition to that of the *Āyuktaka*, perhaps that of a *Kumārāmātya*.² The most important point with regard to these two seals is the *lāñchana*, Lakṣmī attended by elephants. Like the Vaiśālī seals the Bhita finds contain a number of private seals of officials. The most important are the seals of a number of Ministers; or *Amātyas*; Īśvaracandra, Dharmadeva, Boḷa, Nāgadāman, Īśvarānana. So also we have the seals of a number of judges or Generals (*Daṇḍnāyaka*); Śaṅkaradatta, Grāmabala, Lāḷa, Keśavadāsa, Yajñavīrya, Umma, and Vaṅśa. One particular private seal is important because it contains the names of two Police officials; *Pratīhārayor-Vviśākha-Rudradāma(yoḥ)*. In this case one letter, the fifth, was omitted by the decipherer.¹ The Bhita finds have also provided us with one important class of seals, that of a Guild of the *Kulikas* or Bankers, which could not be found in the Vaiśālī collections of Bloch and Spooner. The legend is simply *Kulika-Nigamasya*.² It should be noted in this connection that Mr. R. G. Basak is inclined to translate the word *Kulika* as “artisan.” But though the commentator Bhānuji Dīkṣita explains it as “the foremost person in a company of artisans,” the explanation in the *Amarakoṣa* connects it with the *Śreṣṭhins*.³

c6.66

³ *Annual Report of the Archæological Survey of India, 1911-12*, p. 53. No. 35, Pl. XIX.

c6.67

⁴ *Ibid.* p. 54, No. 42.

c6.68

¹ *Ibid.*, p. 52, No. 32, Pl. XVIII.

c6.69

² *Ibid.*, p. 53, Pl. XVIII. This seal is upside down in the illustration.

c6.70

¹ *Ibid.*, p. 55, No. 52, Pl. XIX.

c6.71

² *Ibid.*, p. 56, No. 55.

c6.72

³ *Epi., Ind. Vol. XV. p. 131, Note 6.*

c6.73

Most probably the four plates from Faridpur belong to the later part of the Gupta period. They belong to the reigns of three different kings about whom nothing is known from any other source.

c6.74

Two of them belong to the reign of a king named Dharmāditya, the third to that of Gopacandra and the fourth to that of Samācāra. Out of these three kings Samācāra is also known from a solitary gold coin identified correctly for the first time by Mr. N. K. Bhāttasali of the Dacca Museum¹ Dharmāditya may be the *Āditya* name of one of the later Gupta Kings but we cannot be too sure of this because in the Damodarpur plates all Gupta Emperors are mentioned by their proper names, which are not even followed by their *Āditya*-names. Hoernle’s proposed identification of Dharmāditya with Yaśodharman need not be considered seriously like his theory of the latter being known as Vikramāditya since the publication of the Sanjan plates of Amoghavarṣa I which indicate distinctly that *Vikramāditya* belonged to the Gupta family.² All that can be said about these plates is that they belong to the period between 550 and 650 A.D.

c6.75

¹ *Catalogue of the coins of the Gupta dynasties, etc.* British Museum p. 150.

c6.76

² *Epi., Ind.* Vol. XVIII, pp. 248, 255.

c6.77

In form, the inscriptions on the Faridpur plates, resemble those on the Damodarpur ones. The first plate, that of the third year of Dharmāditya records that during the reign of the *Mahārājādhirāja* Dharmāditya and during the government of the *Mahārāja* Sthāṇudatta and the period of office of the *Viṣayapati* Jajāva in the *Maṇḍala* of Vāraka, one Vātabhoga applied for the sale of some land to bestow it on a Brāhmaṇa. On the report of the Pustapāla Vinayasena four Kulyavāpas of land were sold to Vātabhoga on receipt of 12 Dīnaras or gold coins. Two points in this inscription deserve special mention; (1) “There is in this district the rule established along the Eastern sea that cultivated lands are things which are sold according to the rate of the sum of four Dīnaras;” (2) “and then the feet of the Emperor receives the sixth part of the price according to the law here.”¹ The mention of the Eastern sea bars the proposed identification of Vāraka with Varendra.² The gain of a sixth part of the price by His Majesty is a new feature in ancient Indian transfers of land. The land purchased by Vātabhoga was bestowed by the same inscription to a Brāhmaṇa named Candra-svāmin as in the case of the fifth Damodarpur plate, in which case the land was given to a god.

c6.78

¹ Ind. Ant. Vol. XXXIX, 1910, p. 197.

c6.79

² Ibid., p. 209

c6.80

The second Faridpur plate is not dated. It records that during the reign of the Emperor Dharmāditya and the government of the Viceroy, the Mahāpratīhāra and Uparika, Nāgadeva in the New Avakāśikā, when Gopāla-svāmin was in charge of the district and Maṇḍala of Vāraka, a man named Vasudeva-svāmin applied for the sale of some land in order to bestow it on a Brāhmaṇa named Soma-svāmin. By this record some land was sold at the current rate of four Dīnaras to the Kulyavāpa.

c6.81

The third Faridpur inscription, that of the year 19 of Gopacandra, records that during the reign of this emperor and the government of the *Mahāpratīhāra*, *Kumārāmātya* and *Uparika* Nāgadeva, when Vatsapāla-svāmin was in charge of the district and *Maṇḍala* of Vāraka, Vatsapāla-svāmin, himself, applied for the sale of some land to bestow it on a Brāhmaṇa named Gomidatta-svāmin. In the second plate the *Pustapāla* was Janmabhūti but in the third plate the *Pustapāla* was Nayabhūti. Like the inscription on the first plate this inscription turns into a deed of gift at the end, because it states that Vatsapāla-svāmin bestowed the land purchased by him on Bhaṭṭa Gomidatta-svāmin. The second plate of the reign of Dharmāditya cannot be very far removed from the third in date because both mention the Headclerk Nayasena.¹

c6.82

¹ *Ibid.*, pp. 204-05.

c6.83

The fourth plate from Faridpur belongs to the reign of the Emperor Samācāra. It records that during the government of the Viceroy, the *Antaraṅga* and *Uparika*, Jīvadatta in the New Avakāśikā, when a *Viṣayapati* named Pavittruka was in charge of the *Maṇḍala* of Vāraka, one Supratika-svāmin applied for the sale of some land for the establishment of certain Vedic ceremonies and accordingly some land was given to this Brāhmaṇa. The inscription on the fourth plate does not record a transfer but a free gift of land.² The material difference in informations to be derived from the inscriptions on the Damodarpur and the Faridpur plates is enormous. The Damodarpur plates show a well-ordered civil government in which the Chief officer of a district was associated with the headclerk of the government offices and the three principal leaders of the mercantile community, the *Nagara-śreṣṭhin*, the *Prathama-Kulika*, and the Caravan-leader. In the majority of cases report on the land to be transferred is submitted by a board of three Pustapālas. In the four Faridpur plates the only officer who is mentioned as such is the headclerk, now styled a *Jyeṣṭha-Kāyastha* instead of *Prathama-Kāyastha*. Even this officer is omitted in the fourth plate and his place taken by a *Jyeṣṭh-ādhikaraṇika* named Dāmuka.

c6.84

² *Epi. Ind.* Vol. XVIII, p. 74-86.

Linked texts (7)