Vol. X, No. 11.] Four Forged Grants from Faridpur. 431 



[N.S.] 



to these conclusions, Mr. Pargiter proceeds to state "the fact 

 then that in this grant the Western form is used generally and 

 the Eastern once un compounded and twice in HM is in full 

 agreement with other grants and has no indication of falsity, 

 but rather a local characteristic of genuineness." (Page 493). 

 The evidence based on the use of two varieties of H when 

 compared with the same evidence derived from the Dhanai- 

 daha grant tends to prove distinctly that either these four 

 inscriptions cannot be placed in the 6th century and must 

 be assigned to the 4th or 5th century a.d., or that they are 

 forged. The evidences supplied by the characters used in 

 the seals of three of these inscriptions prove that records 

 were incised several centuries after the preparation of the 

 seals when the public had forgotten between the forms of 



characters used in previous couturies. 



Mr. Pargiter proceeds to examine my analysis of the 

 characters of the fourth inscription. While treating of the 

 medial form of the long I, Mr. Pargiter admits in the first 

 place that its form " tended to vary considerably /'—a statement 



which serves very well to prove my own conclusions. Among 

 the instances quoted by Mr. Pargiter, it may be pointed out 

 that the medial I in the word Grhitva, in the eighth line of 

 inscription No. 1 (Grant A of Mr' Pargiter) is really Grhotva. 

 If it be taken to be a medial I it will have to be admitted that 

 the form is an abnormal one of the Eastern variety of the 

 early Gupta alphabet. The use of this form in these inscrip- 

 tions and the Eastern variety forms of Sa, La and Ha along 

 with the scroll like form of medial I found in all other in- 

 stances cited by Mr. Pargiter would alone be sufficient to prove 

 that there is something fishy about these records. In the fourth 

 inscription the form of the medial I is that of the Eastern 

 variety of the early Gupta alphabet with a very slight modifi- 

 cation. Mr. Pargiter states "there is a tendency to reduce 



the size of the inner curl of this vowel sign, and in these last 

 two words and in Vikriya (Grant B, line 14) it has practically 

 degenerated into a dot connected with the outer curve. To 

 separate the dot and the curve would be a natural modi- 

 fication, as we find in this grant; and here the I sign always 

 consists of a dot or a small stroke, and a curve on its right, 

 except in Supratika (line 17) where their position is reversed." 

 This statement is sufficient to prove that the form of the 

 medial I in this inscription was something different from the 

 curl which is usual in other inscriptions of the 6th century 

 a.d. The form used seems to be a development of the two 

 curved strokes of which the Eastern variety of the early- 

 Gupta form consisted and which again was a very slight modi- 

 fication of the Asoka-Brahmi form. The form used in the 

 word Supratika (line 17) serves to prove that the left half did 

 not consist of the dot but was really a curve, which in many 



