7 
18G1.] Of Two Land-grants, issued hy King JTastin. 
TItTI I ^tRI Xfl^g «T«nr?wf^5H^T^T I 
WiRTT ^TH*13'HT?7?G %rc^if vf | 
TTcqKfq-JiltrsflfwfiT^T ^T^TT^^^fxr »f 
3lTHTcT: 3TRP I ^JTraTWf ifrs^T ff^TcT cTH^f ^I^R> 
3THTSfH JT'f cTT5qT»S3T^$ I 
=W WTHcTT Xf^Tlf^Tni I 
H^tTI f%3nfcW ^^xs- *f^§ | 
G' . *s ♦n*S ^ 
zr’fT h^hctt ^ , i»n^^iTS^ > xTT^r»r3T u 
WfMWT ?$m TT^ffw: WJRTfefa: | 
W W ct^j ct^x n 
HpJ WWfiaifiir ^rjf HT^fH I 
^n^cfT ^ crreN *Pcif wdcT II SffcT |l 
f^rf^srcf ^ wmwsRiTTlI wiftr^R:- 
fx^xj^^^rfcr | fcrir wtp?? i 
Translation. 
Glory to tlie great God !^[ Well be it ! 
In the year one hundred and fifty-six of the extinction* of the 
sovereignty of the Gupta kings, in the year Mahdvais'akha,f on the 
third day of the light fortnight of the month Kartika, in the fore- 
* The other grant combines this word euphonically with the foregoing. 
t It is the mere rudiment of a superscribed circle which I here read into 
an anustcara, in the original. In the other inscription even this is missing. 
J Is there such a vocable ? Perhaps ^cfsxxHH is meant. I translate as if it 
were. The second inscription has the same anomaly. 
§ Both sets of plates have distinctly which here is nothing. 
|| sf^fx on the plate, by oversight. In the other grant is Hence, by 
abrasion, the Hindi rfsfll. 
If S'iva, on presumption, not by proof. 
* “ Occupation,” says Professor Wilson : an explication already discussed. 
He adds: “* 1=5 or vi=|x ; but it may also be read or ^XWT, ‘ from the 
end, or cessation.” To this liberty of option Mr. Thomas emphatically 
demurs ; and with the strongest of reasons. Any the slightest conversancy with 
Sanskrit paleoglyphs is incompatible with a decision so indulgent. 
t It has not been ascertained what system of computation is here contem- 
plated. Professor Wilson renders : “ in the year (of the cycle) Vais'akh.” 
