502 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [August, 1911.] 
now. In grant B few names are mentioned, and there is not . 
apparently many names were mentioned, few can be deci- 
phered now; yet two are divisible, the same Naya Sena and 
Visaya Kunda (?). This grant therefore shows a greater 
development of the caste-surname than the three earlier grants, 
and if that method of naming was fairly prevalent in this 
outlying district, it was presumably in more general vogue in 
the central part of the province. It seems therefore probable 
that the use of caste-surnames, which is universal at the 
present day in Bengal, was becoming generally adopted in 
the early part of the seventh century. 
POSTSCRIPT. 
_ After this article was in the press another reading of this 
Ghagrahati grant was published in the Report of the Archeo- 
logical Survey of India for 1907-8, p. 255. It is by the late 
Dr. T. Bloch, and he pronounced the grant to be a forgery, 
although it appears from his article that a great deal of the 
incription baffled him; for instance, he says (p. 256)—‘‘ The 
grammar of the inscription, especially the syntax, is in such a 
bad state of confusion, that it would be impossible to attempt 
anything like a connected and literal translation of the text. 
difficulties that he found. My article on the three other grants 
was published last year, and he wo ild ao doubt have entirely 
revised his article if he had lived to see that. 
will only add as a general remark that it is hardly sound — 
to pronounce anything that is not readily intelligible to be # 
forgery be ause even forgeries are meant to be quite intelli- 
gible, otherwise they would fail in their object. 
ca at ct pe ee 
