428 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [December, 1914. 



which can be called ancient. Mahapratihara in the second 

 and third plates should not be taken to mean " the Chief 

 Warden of the Gate." The office was a much higher one 

 and should be translated as ' ' Chief or Prefect of the Guards ' ' 

 Ihe word Mahattara cannot be taken to mean "the leading 

 man of the village," which is also the name of an official 

 Mr. i'argiter s conjecture about its extant form (Matabbar 

 .*^) is unnecessary. The word Mahattara is always used 

 to denote the name of a separate office, and Mr. Pargiter 

 will 1 have no doubt, find many instances of this amon* 

 Northern Indian inscriptions. There is nothing in this inscrip- 

 tion to support the following statement "that under him 

 local administration continued to be, as in the grants B and 

 wUT duc .ted by a Board of Officials, in which the Chief 

 was the oldest official named Damuka." Supratikasvamin 

 seems to have approached the entire body of officials at this 

 Particular locahty of which Damuka was not the oldest, but 

 the chief official Jyesthadhikaranika means the chief Adhika- 

 -anika Similarly the word Jyestha Kayastha should not be 

 taken to mean the • • Oldest Kay astha," but "the Head Clerk 



oLtvin e H° f , the T^ 6 S ' arada > » ot Sva ™cla, is the 

 \ltl?t ° ad J e , cfclV0 of fche man Vihitaghosa, while the word 



cfat ^;V 9 U T . 8epa f ate tiUe ° f the ma i or % of the offi- 

 Zoon 1 ^ IOned K m . thl9grailt - There ^ no necessity for 



were n! T ^ 0Ut tW ° ClaSSeS of leadin g men, ^r thev 



2Zkr^ ^ at a11 Mr Pargiter's rendering of the 

 Benll H^ d ? e \ n0t Carr > 7 c °nviction. It is truAhat in 

 thrown nn !?*?£"? U f d t0 denofce "* aI1 ™ al formation 

 wh?t™J? I f th "u lde ° f a river bed - B «t t^re is no proof 

 r h e Coral, F h ° W that thk Chur land ha * ^ythin. to do with 

 olot oM^ n P u f ? ose3 of marking boundaries a plant or a 

 Plot of land called after a thief is quite sufficient by itself. 



The Validity of the Grants. 



ters of *thZ V T* Paper IhaVe alread y analysed the charac- 

 find that it. I f^ m length ' b,it to my greit regret I 

 te I hi, Th^ d t0 e , Xplahl m * vself clearly to Mr.Pargi- 

 plaie L oHntfn ,,i a V/ the charac ^ used in this copper- 

 t ion) w e r P en.1 / t 5°, Gha 8 ra | na« or the Kotwalipada Inscrip- 

 oe?t»ri£ » n ^ 1'°* al P habets ^ed in three different 



lows -"'Now ! mStat r ent Mr ' Par ^ ter r ™ arks a * fo1 - 

 of-The-wa, Z W6l i kn ° Wn tllafc old ***»<* P^ist in out. 



mporfcr a L P nH l0ng after , the ^ have ^appeared from more 

 buf[t ^ does not r °f T 31Ve Place8 -" This ' in fact > " ^ true > 

 inscription "H P US iD ? r ° vin S fch e genuineness of these 

 executed in rh^ ?? ^ ° Ught t0 ex P ect tha * * document 

 wrifSiTlhan , n. ,Tk T* r f gi ° U 8h0uId sh ™ older styles of 



m«ng than should be found in contemporaneous inscriptions 



