The History of Bengal (Vol. I: Hindu Period; Vol. II: Muslim Period 1200–1757) v1.c19.s6.4

v1.c19.s6.4

The actual work of measurement during the Gupta period was done by means of *nalas* (reeds). In some of the Gupta copper-plates, however, the term *nala* is qualified by the figures 8 and 9 (*aṣṭaka-navaka-nalena* or *aṣṭaka-navaka-nalābhyām*. Kotālipāḍā-Plates and Baigrām Plate). Mr. F. E. Pargiter has taken the view that these figures relate to the number of reeds used in measuring the breadth and length respectively of a *kulyavāpa*, and on the basis of this supposition has calculated the area of a *kulyavāpa* as “a little larger than an acre.”¹ But two considerations seem to militate against this hypothesis: The Pāhārpur Plate, instead of giving two different figures (8 and 9), mentions only one figure, *viz.* 6 (*ṣaṭka-naḍair-apaviñchchhya*). This can only mean that in measuring the land alienated by this particular deed a *nala* measuring six cubits was used. Secondly, in some of the inscriptions where the figures 8 and 9 are given, we get the additional information that the *nala* used was measured by the hand of a particular individual (*e.g.* *Darvvīkarma-hastena*, Baigrām Plate; *Śivachandra-hastena*, Kotālipāḍā Plates). These facts seem to lead to two conclusions—first, that the figures 6, 8 and 9 “stood for the corresponding numbers of cubits representing the measurements” of the *nalas*; and second, that *nalas* of different measurements in cubits were used in different regions of the province. The simultaneous mention of the two figures 8 and 9 in the Faridpur and Baigrām Plates is not easy to explain. It is probable, however, that two different *nalas* were employed, one for measuring the length and the other for measuring the width, of the area disposed of.² Mr. Pargiter’s view about the area of a *kulyavāpa* cannot, therefore, be accepted.³