Vol. VII, No. 8.1 The Ghagrahati (Kotwalipara) Grant. 491 
[N.S. 
and studied the six Angas. In B and C the grantees Soma- 
svamin and Gomidatta-svamin were of the lineage of Kanva, 
were Vajasaneyas, are styled Lauhityas and are commended as 
virtuous. It appears from the tenor of this grant, that 
Supratika-svamin had come to this place and was willing, if he 
could get some land, to settle in it and perform religious rites. 
The matter was transacted between him and the vyavaharins 
who resided here. Nothing is said about the villagers taking 
any part in it. Information of the proposed transaction had 
to be given to the adhikarana and the mahattaras, as has been 
noticed in my article (p. 214), but it is stated clearly that it 
was the vyavaharins who accepted his proposal and gave him 
theland. The arrangement therefore was one entirely between 
him and them. There was no grantor who bought the land 
and bestowed it on a grantee as in the three other plates ; but 
he asked for some land as a consideration for his undertaking as 
a brahman to offer the bali, caru and sacrifices, and they ac- 
cepted his proposal. It was no case of purchase, but a free 
gift by the vyavaharins on condition that he should perform 
priestly functions. The general terms used imply that he was 
to become priest to them generally, and that there was no 
other brahman in the place. Here then we have an instance 
of the way in which brahmans moved onwards and settled as 
priests in new places which had reached a position to need 
their services. 
The arrangement was made with the cognizance of the 
adhikarana and in the presence of the mahatiaras, and the seal 
of the adhikarana would have been affixed to this plate as it 
was to the other grants. The curved shape of the left-hand 
margin of the inscription in all the grants shows, that this 
plate was made to receive a round seal fastened on its front as 
the other grants still have, and that the triangular hole, which 
Babu R. D. Banerji comments on (p. 434), was made to enable 
gave it, it must have been the common property of the vyava- 
harins, i 
record-keeper as in the other grants (p. 213). As there was 
no purchase but the remainder of the char was given, it was 
