Pratna Samiksha

A Journal of Archaeology

New Series

Volume 4

2013

CENTRE FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES & TRAINING

EASTERN INDIA • KOLKATA

Pratna Samiksha, New Series The responsibility of the facts stated, opinions expressed and conclu-
is an annual journal published by the sions reached are entirely those of the author of the respective article.
Centre for Archaeological Studies & Training, Centre for Archaeological Studies & Training, Eastern India does not
Eastern India, Kolkata. accept any responsibility for them.

Editorial Address © 2013 Centre for Archaeological Studies & Training,

Pratna Samiksha Eastern India
Centre for Archaeological Studies & Training,
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
Eastern India, State Archaeological Museum
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any
Old Building, First Floor, 1 Satyen Roy Road
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
Behala, Kolkata 700 034
without the prior written permission of the publisher.
email: castei5n@gmail.com

ISSN 2229 7979

Editor
Sharmi Chakraborty Periodicity: Annual
Founding Editor
Gautam Sengupta Subscription (per volume): ` 1,000.00

Technical Adviser Published by the Member Secretary for the

Buddhadev Bhattacharya Centre for Archaeological Studies & Training,
Editorial Assistant Eastern India (An Autonomous Institution of the
Mithu Karmakar Government of West Bengal)
State Archaeological Museum
Old Building, First Floor
Editorial Advisory Board
1 Satyen Roy Road, Behala
Krishna Bose Kolkata 700 034
Chairperson, Centre for Archaeological Studies email: castei5n@gmail.com
& Training, Eastern India, Kolkata
Printed in India at Calcutta Art Studio
Member Secretary
185/1 Bipin Behari Ganguly Street
Centre for Archaeological Studies & Training,
Kolkata 700 012
Eastern India, Kolkata
K. Paddayya
Professor Emeritus, Deccan College, Pune
B. D. Chattopadhyaya
Former Professor, Centre for Historical Studies,
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Pratip Kumar Mitra
Former Keeper, State Archaeological Museum,
West Bengal
Suchandra Ghosh
Associate Professor, Department of Ancient Indian
History & Culture, University of Calcutta, Kolkata
The Director (ex officio)
Directorate of Archaeology and Museums,
Government of West Bengal
EPIGRAPHY

The Kotalipada Copperplate Inscription of

the Time of Dvadasaditya, Year 14
RYOSUKE FURUI
Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia
(formerly Institute of Oriental Culture), the University of Tokyo

Abstract: Bangladesh has many inscriptions unnoticed or not published properly. One of the most interesting
among them is the copperplate inscription of the time of Dvadasaditya from Kotalipada currently kept in
Bangladesh National Museum. In the present article, I will provide a critical re-edition of the inscription with
notes to the text, translation and discussions on its contents. The style and contents of the inscription attest to
Dvadasaditya’s identity as a king belonging to the same line as Dharmaditya, Gopacandra and Samacaradeva. The
analysis of their plates establishes the chronological order of their reigns. The present plate also reveals a tendency
towards more limited participation by local landed magnates in the process of land sale and donation. The donation
recorded in it is peculiar for the fact that fourteen or more brahmapa donees are given only a small plot of land.

Keywords: Bengal, Faridpur, inscription, the sixth century, Dvadasaditya, rural history.

Introduction Dr Swapan Kumar Biswas of the Museum provid-

Bangladesh has many inscriptions unnoticed or
not published properly, as a consequence of the
two partitions which deprived it of competent
epigraphists. We recently saw the rediscoveries
and publications of those inscriptions, many of
which are held by Department of Archaeology
and Bangladesh National Museum, both in Dhaka.
One of the most interesting among them is the
copperplate inscription of the time of Dvadasaditya
from Kotalipada, currently kept in the aforesaid
museum with accession number 80.513.
This inscription was first mentioned by Shariful
Islam in his article on gold coins bearing the name
of Dvadasaditya, which had been attributed to
Vainyagupta by the earlier scholars. In reference to
the copperplate in concern, which was unpublished
then, he properly rejected the earlier identification
and attributed those coins to an independent king
named Dvadasaditya (Islam 2010). He then pub-
lished the supposed transliteration and translation
of the inscription (Islam 2012). Though he failed
to edit and interpret it properly, the photographs
attached to his article were good enough for me
to decipher most parts. While preparing a revised
reading of the inscription, I could also procure a
scanned digital image of its photographs from the
Bangladesh National Museum on 16 March 2013.
Pratna Samiksha, New Series 4, 2013. © Centre for Archaeological
Studies & Training, Eastern India, Kolkata, pp. 89-98.
ed me another image of better quality, which ena-
bled me to read the inscription completely except a
few letters. I hereby provide the edition of the in-
scription with notes, translation and discussions on
its contents.
The plate was discovered in 1980 at the village
Ramasil-Pirerbadi under Kotalipada upazila, then
in Faridpur district and currently in Gopalganj dis-
trict.1 It is a single copperplate, 29 cm long and 14
cm wide in size, bearing 34 lines of inscriptions, 17
each on both sides (Islam 2012: 71) (Pls 18a and b).2
They are inscribed lengthwise.
A circular seal with decorations is soldered to the
plate on its left side. An additional seal is also at-
tached to the left of the main one (Pl. 18c).3 The
main seal has an image of so-called Gajalakxmi, a
female figure standing on a lotus bud with elephants
pouring water on her head from both sides. El-
ephants are standing on the other lotus buds stem-
ming from the central one. Two kneeling figures,
seemingly female attendants, also accompany her
on both sides. There are two lines of inscription un-
der the image, separated from it by two horizontal
lines. The inscription suggests that the seal belongs
to the office (adhikarapa) of Varakamapdala-vixaya.
The figure and inscription are encircled by four bor-
der lines, of which the outer two are bold and the
90 RYOSUKE FURUI
inner two thin. The additional seal contains three
characters in two rows encircled by two bold border
lines. It is difficult to decipher them properly from
the photograph.
The inscription is engraved in characters which
can be categorized as eastern variety of late Brahmi
script. In terms of palaeography, the characters are
datable to the sixth century. As for orthography, the
characteristics generally found in the early inscriptions
of Bengal, namely, duplication of consonants in
conjunction with r and substitution of v for b, are
observed in the present inscription. However, the
character denoting b is also used for labdh˚ (l.2)
and ˚brahmapa˚ (l.21).4 The language used in the
inscription is Sanskrit, mostly correct but contains
some grammatical errors as corrected in notes to the
text below.
The inscription is a so-called land sale grant
which records purchase and donation of land plots
petitioned by particular individuals to the office
called adhikarapa and related people. It starts with
the date, the seventeenth day of the month Vai-
sakha in the fourteenth year, surely in the regnal
era of the reigning king (l.1). The date is followed
by the auspicious word svasti and reference to the
time as the reign of maharajadhiraja Dvadasaditya,
when mahasamanta vindapati Haradatta was govern-
ing under him (ll.1-3). Then it records that rajanaka
Kxasama and influential people, including forty-
one named vixaya-mahattaras, mahattaras and phalkas
at the adhikarapa in Varaka-mapdala, received the
petition of rajanaka Viviktasoma, who expressed his
wish to purchase a land plot from them for religious
donation and requested them to give him a plot af-
ter receiving money from him and dividing the land
in the vixaya (ll.3-12).
After considering the case, the receivers of
petition ascertained with confirmation of pustapala
Jayatsena that the custom practised in the east is
followed in the vixaya, according to which tax-
yielding land is sold by four dinaras for a kulyavapa.
They also confirmed that such size of land plot is
sold with the akxaya-nivi tenure and that there would
be the acquisition of the one-sixth part of merit for
the king. Following this consideration, they decided
to give him a plot as he wishes (ll.13-17).
Then a part of the village land in village
Pasadhanakagdhaoga was sold to Viviktasoma
after receiving eight dinaras from him, after kutumbins
accompanied by pradhanas and so on belonging to a
locality called Alnagartta divided it by the standard
of eight-by-nine nala by Sivacandra’s cubit. In
turn Viviktasoma donated it to brahmapas of whom
fourteen are named with references to particular
quarter part or half quarter part (pada/ardha-pada)
assigned to them (ll.17-24). Then the aforesaid and
future samantas and kings are requested to protect
the donation (ll.25-27). Five benedictory and
imprecatory verses are cited after that (ll.27-32).
Finally the landmarks of four cardinal directions
are described (ll.32-34).
The text of inscription, notes to it and its trans-
lation are presented in the following sections.
Text5
Seal (Pl. 18c): Main
1. Varakamapdala-vixay-adhi-
2. karapasya
Subsidiary
1. vi
2. di(?) tta(?)
Plate: Obverse (Pl. 18a)
1. Samvat 10 4 Vaisakha-di 10 7 svasty=asyam=
prthivyam=apratirathe Yayaty-Amvarixa-
samadhrtau ma-
2. marajadhiraja-sri-Dvadasaditya-bhatta[ra]-
ka-rajye tat-prasada-labdh-aspade Purvva-
samudr-amvu-prakxalita-carape
3. sri-mahasamanta-vindapati-
Haradattasy=adhyasana-kale Varaka-
mapdale tad-viniyuktaka-rajanaka-
Kxasamo=dhika-
4. rape vixayamahattara-Dhrticandra-vixayama-
hattara-Ghoxacandra-mahattara-Kolla-ma-
hattara-Dimva-yajniya-
5. mrtakupda … mahattara-Jinacandra-mahat-
tara-Guhayasa-mahattara-Thodda-mahatta-
ra-Mi-
6. ttrasvami-mahattara-Bhasubha-mahattara-Si-
lacandra-mahattara-Subhasvami-mahattara-
Phalgurudra-ma-
 The Kotalipada Copperplate Inscription of the Time of Dvadasaditya, Year 14
7. hattar-Amrta-mahattara-Kula-mahattara-
Guhacandra-mahattara-Gopda-mahattara-
Sarvvanandi-mahattara-Ke-
8. pta-mahattara-Bhapasu-mahattara-
Prabhasvami-mahattara-Mahendra-
Cittracandrau mahattara-Bhanayana-Vappa-
9. bhata-Saryyaka-Dimvara-Sarvvadasa-phalka-
Umacandra-Sivadeva-Vrhatkarppa-Subhade-
va-Jayadatta-Sila-
10. candra-Subhadeva-Dudhrasara-phalka-
Sarvvakala-Gaudacandra-Naradeva-
Xuogakadeva-Kakubhacandr-adayo pra-
11. krtayas=ca rajanaka-Viviktasomena vijnaptah
icchamy=aham bhavatam sakasa kxettra-
khapdam=upakriya de-
12. va-dvija-gurubhya pratipadayitu[m]
tad=arhatha matto mulyam grhitva vixaye
vibhajya datum=iti
13. yata etad=abhyarthanam=adhikrty=
asmabhih pustapala-Jayatsena-krt-
avadharapay=avadharita-
14. m=ast=iha vixaye prak-pravrtta maryyada
catur-ddinarikya-kulyavapena pratikara-
kxettrapi vikriyamapakani tatha-va-
15. pa-kxettra-khapdam=akrta-kalana-drxti-
mattra-pravandh-akxayanivi-dharmmapa
vikriyamapakas=tac=ca paramabhattara-
16. ka-padanam=attra dharmma-xad-bhaga-
labhas=tad=etam vrttim=adhigamy=asya
sādho sva-pupya-kirtti-samsthapana-krt-abhi-
laxyah yatha-
17. saokalp-abhivanchitam
kriyatam=ity=avagamya rajanaka-
Viviktasomad=axtau dinar-asrdya Pa-
Reverse (Pl. 18b)
18. sadha[naka]gdha[oga] Alnagartteya-sa-
pradhan-adi-kutumvino=bhivyañcitaka-
kramepa tad-grama-bhumau Sivacandra-
hasten=axtaka-
19. navaka-nale[n=a]pavinchya tamra-patta-
dharmmap=a-candra-tar-arkka-sthiti-vikrxta-
kalam sam[a]bhogyam catus-sima-krtam
vibhagam=a[th=a]-
20. smabhir=vvikritam=anen=api rajanaka-
Viktasomena parattr-anugraha-kxakxipa
mata-pittror=atmanas=ca pupy-abhivr-
91
21. ddhaye nana-gottra-carapa-[ta]pas-
adhyaya-veda-vedaog-adi-brahmapa-
Vanasarmmasvami Narayapasvami-deya-
22. ka-padam Himasvami-deyaka-padam
Arkkasvami Suklasvami Candrik-arddha-
padam Kulasvami Ji-
23. vasvamino Candrik-arddha-padam
Nicitasvami Rakxitasvami Maghasvami-
Agnisvami-Umila-
24. svami Kesavasvami-Puxtisvamy-adayo
vrahmap-aryyapam=udaka-purvvepa
pratipaditam
25. tad=uparilikhitak-agami-samanta-
rajabhis=samadhigata-sastra-dharmmabhi
bhumi-dan-anupalana-
26. kxep-anumodanexu samyag=dattany=api
danani rajabhir=anyaih pratipalaniyan=ity=
etat=pratyavagamya bhumi-
27. danam sutaram=eva pratip[a]laniyam=iti
bhavanti c=attra paramarixi-gitah slokah
sruyante
28. svadattam=paradatt[a]m=va yo
hareta vasundharam [|*] sa vixtaya[m]
krmir=bhutva pitrbhis=saha pacyate [|| 1*]
29. [xa]xtir=vvarxa-sahasrapi svargge dati
bhumidah [|] akxepta c=anumanta ca
tany=eva narake vaset [|| 2*] purvva-
30. dattam dvijatibhyo yatnad=rakxa
Yudhixthirah [|*] mahim mahimatam srextha
danac=chreyo=nupalanam [|| 3*] iyam nrpa-
satair=ddatta diyate
31. [ca] punah punah [|*] yasya yasya yada
bhumis=tasya tasya tada phalam [|| 4*] vi-
ndhy-atavixv=anambhassu suxka-kotara-vasi-
32. nah [|*] krxp-ahayo=bhijayante bhumi-
danam haranti ye [|| 5*] sima-liogani c=attra
purvvepa Vapdakhataka-grama-[si]-
33. ma dakxipena Ghaghatta-sima pascimena
suxka-puxkaripi-purvv-ali-pravixtaka-sima
uttare-
34. pa Sragdhakasoti-sima c=eti 4
Notes to the Text
Line 2 marajadhiraja˚: emend harajadhiraja˚.
Line 4 ˚yajniya: emend ˚yajniy-A-.
Line 5 Four akxaras are struck out after mrtakupda.
92 RYOSUKE FURUI
Line 11 sakasa: emend sakasat.
Line 14 ˚maryyada: emend ˚maryada. catur-ddi-
narikya˚: emend catur-dinarikya˚
Line 15 ˚khapdam=akrta˚: emend
˚khapdas=akrta˚.
Line 16 ˚abhilaxyah: emend ˚abhilaxasya.
Line 17 saokalp˚: emend saokalp˚. dinar-asrdya:
emend dinaram=asrjya.
Line 18 The first six akxaras of this line are dis-
turbed much by the possible erasure and
overwriting of characters in this part.
˚bhivyancitaka˚: emend ˚bhivyanjitaka˚.
Line 20 ˚Viktasomena: emend Viviktasomena.
˚kxakxipa: emend kaokxipa.
Line 24 ˚y-adayo: emend ˚y-adinam.
Line 25 ˚dharmmabhi: emend ˚dharmabhir.
Line 27 paramarixi˚: emend paramarxi˚.
Line 29 [xa]xtir=vvarxa˚: emend xaxtim varxa˚.
dati: emend modati.
Line 30 Yudhixthirah: emend Yudhixthira.
Line 34 The last akxara seems to be a numeral de-
noting 4.
Translation
Main seal
Of the office of Varakamapdala-vixaya
Subsidiary seal
vidi(?)tta(?)
Main text
Year 14, month Vaisakha, day 17. Welfare! In the
reign of maharajadhiraja illustrious Dvadasaditya-
bhattaraka, who had no match on this earth and
was equal to Yayati and Ambarixa, at the time
when illustrious mahasamanta vindapati Haradatta,
who acquired the authority by his (=Dvadasadi-
tya’s) favour and whose feet were washed by water
of the eastern sea, was in position (ll.1-3).
In Varaka-mapdala, his (Haradatta’s) appointed
official (viniyuktaka) rajanaka Kxasama and the people
(prakrti) beginning with vixayamahattara Dhrticandra,
vixayamahattara Ghoxacandra, mahattara Kolla, ma-
hattara Dimva, yajniya Amrtakupda, mahattara Jina-
candra, mahattara Guhayasas, mahattara Thodda,6
mahattara Mitrasvamin, mahattara Bhasubha, ma-
hattara Silacandra, mahattara Subhasvamin, mahat-
tara Phalgurudra, mahattara Amrta, mahattara Kula,
mahattara Guhacandra, mahattara Gopda, mahattara
Sarvanandin, mahattara Kepta, mahattara Bhapasu,
mahattara Prabhasvamin, mahattaras Mahendra and
Citracandra,7 mahattara Bhanayana, Vappabhata,
Saryaka, Dimvara and Sarvadasa, phalka Umacan-
dra, Sivadeva, Brhatkarpa, Subhadeva, Jayadatta,
Silacandra, Subhadeva, Dudhrasara, phalka Sar-
vakala, Gaudacandra, Naradeva, Xuogakadeva and
Kakubhacandra at the adhikarapa, were informed
by rajanaka Viviktasoma (as follows) (ll.3-11): ‘After
purchasing a land plot from you, I wish to give (it)
to the deities, brahmapas and teachers. So you are
requested to give (it to me) after receiving money
from me and dividing it in the vixaya (ll.11-12).’
Then having made this request a subject mat-
ter, it was ascertained by us with the confirmation
made by record keeper (pustapala) Jayatsena (as fol-
lows): ‘Here in this vixaya there is the custom prac-
ticed in the east. (According to it) lands yielding tax
are sold by four dinaras for one kulyavapa. Such vapas
of (i.e. size of) land plots are sold by akxayanivi-dhar-
ma of continuance with only observation without
calculation made. And also there is the acquisition
of the one sixth part of merit in this case for his
majesty the supreme lord (paramabhattaraka). So af-
ter studying this practice, it should be sold to this
good person who made erection of own merit and
fame his wish, according to his intention and desire
(ll.13-17).’
Considering as such, after procuring eight di-
naras from rajanaka Viviktasoma, in Pasadhanakagd-
haoga, after kutumbins including pradhana and so on
belonging to Alnagartta divided (it) by manifested
procedure in the land of village with eight by nine
nala by Sivacandra’s cubit, a part (of land) with four
borders fixed was then sold by us by the rule of cop-
perplate, to be enjoyed for the period prolonged as
long as the moon, stars, the sun and the earth exist
(ll.17-20). It was given with libations of water by
this rajanaka Viviktasoma, wishing favour in other
world, for the increase of merit of mother, father
and self, to the noble brahmapas beginning with brah-
mapas of various gotras, schools, asceticism, learning,
Veda, Vedaoga and so on, (namely) Vanasarmas-
vamin, Narayapasvamin, (to whom) a quarter part
of Deyaka (is assigned),8 Himasvamin, (to whom) a
quarter part of Deyaka (is assigned), Arkasvamin,
 The Kotalipada Copperplate Inscription of the Time of Dvadasaditya, Year 14
Suklasvamin, (to whom) a half quarter part of Can-
drika (is assigned), Kulasvamin and Jivasvamin, (to
whom) a half quarter part of Candrika (is assigned),
Nicitasvamin, Rakxitasvamin, Maghasvamin, Ag-
nisvamin, Umilasvamin, Kesavasvamin and Puxtis-
vamin (ll.20-24). So this land donation should be
excessively protected by above-written and future
samantas and kings who fully understand dharma of
sastra, in agreement on preservation and dismissal
of land donation, knowing exactly that the dona-
tions completely given should also be protected by
other kings (ll.25-27). There are also the verses sung
by the supreme seer (rxi). They are heard (as follows)
(l.27):
‘(No matter it was) given by himself or given by
others, the one who appropriates the land, he, after
being born a worm in excreta, will be boiled with
his ancestors (Verse1, l.28).’
‘For sixty thousand years, the land giver enjoys
in the heaven. The one who refuses it and anoth-
er agreeing with him would live in the hell for the
same period (Verse 2, l.29).’
‘Protect with effort what was previously given to
brahmapas, oh, Yudhixthira! Oh, the best of land-
holders! The preservation of land is superior to its
donation (Verse 3, ll.29-30).’
‘This given by hundred kings should also be giv-
en again and again. To whom the land belongs, the
merit belongs (Verse 4, ll.30-31).’
‘Living in dried caves in the waterless Vindhyan
forests, those who stole land donation will be born
black snakes (Verse 5, ll.31-32).’
Then the border marks are: to the east, the bor-
der of Vapdakhataka-grama (ll.32-33); to the south,
the border of Gha-ghatta; to the west, the border
entering the eastern embankment of the dried lake
(l.33); and to the north, the border of Sragdhaka-
soti. 4 (ll.33-34).
Discussions
The provenance, style and contents of the
inscription strongly suggest that it belongs to a
group of land sale grants including the three
Faridpur plates and the Ghugrahati grant (Sircar
1965: 363-72; Bhattasali 1983). Dvadasaditya,
the king under whose reign the present grant was
issued, most probably belonged to the line of
93
kings including Dharmaditya, Gopacandra and
Samacaradeva mentioned in those inscriptions, as
indicated by almost the same phrases describing
them.9 Their continued control of the area around
present districts of Faridpur and Gopalganj in
Dhaka division of Bangladesh is attested by those
plates, while Gopacandra’s control over some areas
of western Bengal is confirmed by the Mallasarul
and Jayarampur grants mentioning his reign (Sircar
1965: 373, ll.2-3; Tripathi 1997: 174-5, ll.1-10).
We have no clue to the genealogical relation of
those kings. Neither have we any information to
locate their reigns in the absolute chronology, as
the inscriptions are dated in the regnal era of each
king. What we can do at most is assigning their
reigns to the period around the mid-sixth century
on palaeographical ground and trying to fix their
relative chronology.
The later date of Samacaradeva than all the
other kings is somehow clear on palaeographic
ground and widely accepted. The order of succes-
sion of Dharmaditya and Gopacandra has, how-
ever, been in dispute. D. C. Sircar, following F. E.
Pargiter, considers the former predating the latter
on palaeographic ground, while R. C. Majumdar
holds the opposite view claiming that maharaja Vija-
yasena of the Mallasarul plate of Gopacandra and
the Gunaighar grant of Vainyagupta are identical
and Gopacandra, his overlord, is the earliest among
the three kings (Sircar 1965: 370, note 1; Majum-
dar 1971: 42-3). The identification of maharaja Vi-
jayasena, critical to the latter theory, is not necessar-
ily certain, as Bardhman and Comilla, the areas to
which both inscriptions pertain, are far away from
each other and Vijayasena is too ordinary a name
for local rulers to permit identification by itself. On
the other hand, palaeography cannot be a decisive
tool in establishing chronological order of inscrip-
tions within a narrow time frame like the Faridpur
plates and the present one. While the use of both
tripartite and bipartite forms of ya in the plate of
Gopacandra may indicate its later date than those
of Dharmaditya and Dvadasaditya where only the
early tripartite form is used (Pargiter 1910: Plate
III, ll.3, 18, Plate I, l.20, Plate II, l.9; present plate,
l.4), ha in the former and that of Dvadasaditya is
expressed by an earlier character which looks like a
94 RYOSUKE FURUI
letter J, in contrast to the later form like an angu-
lar hook open to the right found in both plates of
Dharmaditya (Pargiter 1910: Plate III, l.22, Plate
I, l.2, Plate II, l.2; present plate, l.4). We have to
search for the clues elsewhere. The answer lies in
the style and contents of the inscriptions.
In terms of style, those inscriptions can be
divided into two groups. The present plate of
Dvadasaditya and the plate of Dharmaditya dated
year 3 contain almost the same clause requesting
present and future samantas and kings to protect the
donation (ll.25-27; Sircar 1965: 366, ll.20-23). Such
a clause is absent in another plate of Dharmaditya
without date, the Faridpur plate of Gopacandra
and the Ghugrahati grant of Samacaradeva. The
former group is also common in not naming the
administrative unit above Varakamapdala, while
mentioning subordinate rulers just under the king
(ll.2-3; Sircar 1965: 364, ll.2-3). In contrast, all the
other plates mention Navyavakasika as a unit above
Varakamapdala-vixaya (Ibid.: 367, l.3, 370, l.3;
Bhattasali 1983: 76, l.3). In view of the later date of
the Ghugrahati grant, the latter group must belong
to the period later than the former. As the two
plates of Dharmaditya, of which each has either
of the characteristics of two groups, indicate the
stylistic transition, we can assume Dvadasaditya,
Dharmaditya, Gopacandra and Samacaradeva in
succession as their chronological order.
This assumption is endorsed by the contents
of the inscriptions. Sivacandra, on whose cubit a
nala, standard measure of length, is based, is called
‘just (dharmasila) Sivacandra’ in the Faridpur plates
of Dharmaditya without date and of Gopacandra
(Sircar 1965: 369, l.19, 371, l.19), while no adjective
is attached to his name in the present plate of
Dvadasaditya and another plate of Dharmaditya
(l.18; Sircar 1965: 366, l.15). In both Faridpur
plate of Gopacandra and Ghugrahati grant of
Samacaradeva, the arbitrators called kulavaras are
appointed (ibid.: 371, l.18; Bhattasali 1983: 77,
l.15), while no references as such are found in the
other inscriptions. Thus the contents of inscriptions
also support the order suggested above. It should be
noted, however, that the grants of Dvadasaditya,
Dharmaditya and Gopacandra were issued within a
relatively short period, as names of people common
to them indicate.10 Though common names alone
do not prove their identity, their appearance in
relation to the same locality and organisation, the
adhikarapa of Varakamapdala-vixaya, in those plates
makes it highly plausible.
The administrative setting delineated from
the present inscription is the same as revealed by
the Faridpur and Ghugrahati plates. The highest
administrative unit under the king, which is not
clearly named in this plate but called Navyavakasi-
ka in the later grants, is governed by a governor
conferred of the position by the royal favour, while
the administrative unit at the next level, Varaka-
mapdala or Varakamapdala-vixaya, is managed by
an administrator appointed by the governor. In the
present inscription, mahasamanta vindapati Haradatta
who is said to have acquired the authority by favour
of the king is governing the highest unit and ‘his
appointed official’ (tad-viniyuktaka) rajanaka Kxasama
is managing Varakamapdala (ll.2-3). Though the
meaning of vindapati is unclear, the title of maha-
samanta indicates Haradatta’s position as a subordi-
nate ruler. Kxasama also wields the title of rajanaka
which connotes his position as a subordinate ruler
of lower rank. The enrolment of subordinate rulers
as administrators of different levels points to the de-
pendence of the state machinery on them for local
administration. It is enabled and at the same time
necessitated by their authority and presence in lo-
cality, of which rajanaka Viviktasoma’s act as a peti-
tioner of land sale grant is one symptom. He seems
to have tried to extend his interest in the locality
through donation of the land plot to fourteen or
more brahmapas. His wealth accumulated through
the control of a particular locality must have made
it possible.
The procedure recorded in the inscription
centres on the receivers of the petition, namely,
rajanaka Kxasama and forty-one named people at the
adhikarapa, who received the petition, ascertained
its validity with the help of pustapala Jayatsena and
decided on sale of the land plot to the petitioner.
The inclusion of the administrator of vixaya in
this group and the appearance of the adhikarapa in
locative form are unique to the present case. In the
other grants, both the adhikarapa and mahattaras act
 The Kotalipada Copperplate Inscription of the Time of Dvadasaditya, Year 14
as receivers and administrators are just mentioned
of their ‘appointment’ (ayoga), ‘managing together’
(samvyaaharat) and ‘managing’ (vyavaharat) to indicate
the time of recorded incidents, in the same way
as the reign of king and the rule of governors
(Sircar 1965: 364, ll.3-4, 368, l.6, 370, ll.5-6;
Bhattasali 1983: 76, l.5). The difference implies the
involvement of the administrator in the decision
making on land sales in the early phase, though it
could be rather nominal and the actual authority
was wielded by the people who gathered at the
adhikarapa.
Another implication is related to the adhikarapa.
Its constituents are not mentioned in the present
plate as is the case of the Faridpur grant of Dhar-
maditya, year 3 (ll.3-4, Sircar 1965: 364, l.4). The
references in the other plates to the adhikarapa as
‘headed by’ (pramukha) jyexthakayastha or jyexthadhika-
rapika (ibid.: 368, l.7, 370, l.6; Bhattasali 1983: 76,
ll.5-6) suggest that it is an organisation constituted
by clerical groups including their elders. What
should be noted is a subtle change of its form from
locative (adhikarape) in the present plate to nomina-
tive (adhikarapam) in the later grants. The former
defines the adhikarapa as a venue where vixaya-ma-
hattaras and others gather and preside over the case
of land sales, while the latter makes it a constituent
of the authority on such a case, together with them.
Though its appearance in locative form can be an
engraving mistake, it can indicate a change around
the organisation, which is also detectable in other
aspects as I will discuss later.
The people gathered at the adhikarapa seem to
belong to the class of local landed magnates. The
title mahattara wielded by many of them attests to
their position. The forty-one local magnates men-
tioned in the present inscription can be listed in
three categories as follows:
Vixayamahattara (2): Dhrticandra, Ghoxacandra.
Mahattara (26): Kolla, Dimva, yajniya Amrtakupda,
Jinacandra, Guhayasas, Thodda, Mitrasvamin,
Bhasubha, Silacandra, Subhasvamin, Phalgurudra,
Amrta, Kula, Guhacandra, Gopda, Sarvanandin,
Kepta, Bhapasu, Prabhasvamin, Mahendra, Citra-
candra, Bhanayana, Vappabhata, Saryaka, Dim-
vara, Sarvadasa.
95
Phalka (13): Umacandra, Sivadeva, Brhatkarpa,
Subhadeva, Jayadatta, Silacandra, Subhadeva,
Dudhrasara, Sarvakala, Gaudacandra, Naradeva,
Xuogakadeva, Kakubhacandra.
The title yajniya, ‘one skilled in ritual perform-
ance’ prefixed to Amrtakupda, together with name
endings deva and svamin of some members, attests to
the inclusion of some brahmapas in those categories.
Also notable is the differentiation between vixayama-
hattara and mahattara. The prior reference and
smaller number seem to indicate superiority of the
former to the latter. Such a differentiation is also
found in the Ghugrahati grant (Bhattasali 1983:
76, ll.6-8). The criteria of their differentiation are,
however, unclear and they are rather used indis-
criminately in the Faridpur grants of Dharmaditya
and Gopacandra. All the listed members belong to
the category of vixayamahattara in the plate of Dhar-
maditya dated year 3, while they are called ‘mahatta-
ras of vixayas accompanied by mahattara Somaghoxa’
in another plate of the same king (Sircar 1965: 364,
ll.4-6, 368, ll.7-8). In the plate of Gopacandra, only
mahattara is found to be attached to personal names,
though the relevant part is not readable fully due to
the serious damages (ibid.: 370-1, ll.6-9).
In contrast, phalka constitutes a different catego-
ry. Meaning ‘one who has an expanded or extended
body’ (Monier-Williams 2000: 718, col.1), it also
seems to denote a kind of local magnates like ma-
hattara, the comparative form of ‘large, great’ (ma-
hat). While its lower position in hierarchy shown by
its mention after the others, their possible promo-
tion to mahattara/vixayamahattara is suggested by the
case of Subhadeva who is mentioned as phalka and
vixayamahattara respectively in the two plates (l.9;
Sircar 1965: 364, l.5). More important is, however,
the disappearance of this category from all the later
grants. It is related to another phenomenon, name-
ly, decrease of named members in those grants.
The number of named members shows a
tendency of decrease with forty-one, eighteen
and six respectively listed in the present plate,
the grant of Dharmaditya dated year 3 and the
Ghugrahati plate (ll.4-10; Sircar 1965: 364, ll.4-6;
Bhattasali 1983: 76, ll.6-8), while another grant of
Dharmaditya names only a representative mahattara
and the number of mahattaras in the Faridpur plate
96 RYOSUKE FURUI
of Gopacandra is unclear due to corrosion of the
plate (Sircar 1965: 368, ll.7-8, 370-1, ll.6-9). The
phrases like ‘people beginning with/accompanied
by’ (adayo/puroga prakrtayas) and ‘many other (anye ca
vahavah) pradhanas and vyavaharins’ suggest inclusion
of other unnamed members in the local magnates
working with the adhikarapa (ll.10-11; Sircar 1965,
364, l.6; Bhattasali 1983: 76, ll.8-9). The listing of
names, however, may still denote the importance
attached to the named members and their capacity
to represent the others. Hence the decrease of
their number can be interpreted as the evidence
of fewer members wielding the authority. This
tendency towards more limited participation was
present from the beginning in the form of exclusion
of kutumbins from the process of decision making.
They were involved in the cases of land sale grants
as members of the adhikarapa or the ones affiliated
with it in the copperplate inscriptions of north
Bengal in the fifth and sixth centuries (Ex. Sircar
1965: 288, ll.3-6, 333, ll.2-3, 353, ll.4-12). The
exclusion of phalkas and fewer members mentioned
with their names suggest further development in this
direction through the sixth century, resulting in the
ascendancy of upper section of landed magnates.
The decrease of members is accompanied by
the growing importance of the adhikarapa and its
clerical members. The changing character of the
adhikarapa from the venue to the subject of author-
ity and the clear reference to its head by his name
in the later inscription reflect this tendency. The
ascendancy of both adhikarapa and upper section
of landed magnates seems to have resulted in their
alliance to wield authority over other residents as
a bloc. The appointment of some members of the
adhikarapa to kulavaras in the later grants shows an
aspect of this alliance (Sircar 1965: 371, l.18; Bhat-
tasali 1983: 77, l.15). As arbitrators assigned to the
role of implementing the order of the adhikarapa
and affiliated local magnates including the measure-
ment and demarcation of plots to be donated, they
were charged with the duty which had collectively
been fulfilled by ‘us’, namely those decision makers,
in the earlier grant (Sircar 1965: 366, l.16).11 The
alliance of both clerical and landed elites and the
concentration of power in smaller number of them
enabled and at the same time necessitated the del-
egation of a few professionals among their clerical
members to implement their order.
It should be noted, on the other hand, that in the
present plate, the same duty is fulfilled by kutumbins
of the locality including their upper section called
pradhana (ll.18-19), which is the class of landed
magnates mentioned side by side with mahattaras in
some contemporary inscriptions (Sircar 1965: 371,
l.9; Tripathi 1997: 176, ll.25-28; Bhattasali 1983:
76, l.9). It is similar to some cases in the fifth century
North Bengal in which kutumbins including their
dominant section called vyavaharins were requested
to measure, divide and give land to be donated
(Sircar 1965: 358, ll.18-19, 362, ll.19-20, 383, ll.13-
15). This phenomenon and its disappearance in
the later inscriptions can be taken as an evidence
of exclusion of kutumbins by ascendant landed
magnates, from not only the process of decision
making but also of its implementation.
The present inscription is also notable for large
number of donees of whom fourteen are named
(ll.21-24). It makes a stark contrast with the other
cases, where donees are single brahmapas (Sircar
1965: 366, ll.18-19, 368, ll.10-11, 371, ll.12-13;
Bhattasali 1983: 77, l.17). More remarkable is the
fact that those fourteen or more brahmapas are giv-
en just two kulyavapas of land plot according to the
price paid for it, eight dinaras, and the stated rate of
four dinaras for a kulyavapa (ll.14, 17). Its small size is
highlighted by comparison with three, slightly more
than a half and one kulyavapas given to each donee
in the three Faridpur plates (Sircar 1965: 366,
ll.16-17, 369, ll.15-16, 371, l.20).12 Furthermore,
particular quarter parts and half quarter parts are
especially mentioned as assigned to some donees.
One quarter part of Deyaka is assigned to Vana-
sarmasvamin and Narayapasvamin, and another
to Himasvamin (ll.21-22). One half quarter part
of Candrika is assigned to Arkasvamin and Suklas-
vamin, and another to Kulasvamin and Jivasvamin
(ll.22-23). The unmentioned last quarter part seems
to be shared by the remaining seven or more brah-
mapas (ll.23-24). Except Himasvamin, whose por-
tion amounts to half a kulyavapa if it means a quar-
ter of donated plot, all the other brahmapa donees
are assigned too small a portion compared with the
size of land plots given to individual brahmapas in
 The Kotalipada Copperplate Inscription of the Time of Dvadasaditya, Year 14
the other grants mentioned above. Accordingly, it is
reasonable to assume that what brahmapas acquire in
the present case is the land plot additional to their
own. Small size of the plot and its unequal distribu-
tion among brahmapas, resulting in seven or more of
them given a quarter, further suggest that what is
actually donated is not a land plot but income from
it. In that case, pada and ardha-pada should be in-
terpreted as the fourth and eighth share of income
from the donated plot, assigned to each group of
donees. The cultivation of the plot may be under-
taken by local kutumbins who measured and divided
the plot (ll.18-19).
97
As for the location of recorded incident, there
is still uncertainty on the name of settlement due
to the disturbed condition of relevant part of
the plate (l.18). What is sure is its location within
Varakamapdala-vixaya. The environment of do-
nated tract is inferable from its border demarcation
(ll.32-34). The boat landing (ghatta), embankment
of dried lake and the village named Vapdakhataka
surrounding it points to a riverine tract with abun-
dance of water bodies and accompanying features
including canals, ponds and embankments.

Acknowledgements : I sincerely thank Dr Swapan Kumar Biswas, Keeper (Current Charge) of Ban-
gladesh National Museum, for providing me digital scanned images of photographs of the inscription. I
also thank the authority of the museum on this matter. The research which resulted in the present work
was supported by JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) (22720264). I am grateful to the concerned
authority on this account.

Notes
1. For the detail of discovery, see (Islam 2012: 71).
2. The length mentioned by Islam seems to include
the seal attached to the left, according to the observation
of the photograph. Respective sizes of the plate and the
seal are not recorded by him.
3. Islam failed to mention the presence of addition-
al seal (Islam 2012: 71).
4. Numerals in parentheses indicate lines of the in-
scription.
5. Read from the digital scanned images provided
by Bangladesh National Museum. Courtesy of Bangla-
desh National Museum.
6. He seems to be identical with mahattara Thoda
mentioned as the owner of land plot from which a part is
donated in the Faridpur plate, without date (Sircar 1965:
369, l.17).
7. They are especially mentioned together in dual
form.
8. The references to Deyaka-pada and Candrik-ar-
dha-pada are inserted in the names of donee brahmapas,
which otherwise could have made a compound with adi
at the end.
9. ‘asyam=prthivyam=apratirathe Yayaty-Amvar-
ixa-samadhrtau’ (l.1; Sircar 1965: 363, l.1, 370, l.1). With
addition of Nrga and Nahuxa ahead of Yayati (Ibid.:
367, ll.1-2; Bhattasali 1983: 76, ll.1-2).
10. mahapratihar-oparika Nagadeva (Sircar 1965: 367-
8, ll.3-4, 370, ll.3-4). vixayamahattara/mahattara Ghoxa-
candra (l.4; Sircar 1965: 364, l.5, 371, ll.7-8), mahattara
Thoda (l.5; Sircar 1965: 369, l.17), phalka/vixayamahattara
Subhadeva (l.9; Sircar 1965: 364, l.5), vixayamahattara/
mahattara Anacara (ibid.: 364, l.5, 371, l.8), jyexthakayastha
Nayasena (ibid.: 368, l.7, 370, l.6).
11. The decision in the case of the Faridpur plate of
Dharmaditya without date also seems to be implemented
by the adhikarapa and affiliated local magnates. Though
there is no clear reference to the subject of implementa-
tion, neither is mention of kulavaras in the relevant part
of the inscription (Sircar 1965: 368-9, ll.14-20).
12. The size of the second case is estimated from
the price paid for it, namely 2 dinaras 3 rupakas and 6
gapdakas. The land donated in the Ghugrahati grant is
the remaining part of Vyaghracoraki excluding three
kulyavapas donated previously with copperplate grant
(Bhattasali 1983: 77, ll.15-16). It should be emphasised
that all of them are measured by the same standard
based on Sivacandra’s cubit (l.18; Sircar 1965: 366, l.15,
369, l.19, 371, l.19).
98 RYOSUKE FURUI

References
Bhattasali, Nalinikanta (1983) [1925-26]. ‘The
Ghugrahati Copper-Plate Inscription of
Samachara-Deva’, Epigraphia Indica 18: 74-86.
Islam, Shariful (2010). ‘A Fresh Assessment of the Coins
of Vainyagupta’, Journal of Ancient Indian History 26,
2009-10: 109-112.
Islam, Shariful (2012). ‘Kotalipada Copper Plate of
Dvadasaditya’, Journal of the Asiatic Society 53(4),
2011: 71-82.
Majumdar, R. C. (1971). History of Ancient Bengal.
Calcutta: Bharadwaj & Co.
Monier-Williams, M. (2000) [1899]. Sanskrit-English
Dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with
Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages (new
ed., reprint), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pargiter, F. E. (1910). ‘Three Copper-Plate Grants from
East Bengal’, Indian Antiquary 39: 193-216.
Sircar, D. C. (ed.) (1965). Select Inscriptions Bearing on
Indian History and Civilization, Vol. 1: From the Sixth
Century bc to the Sixth Century ad (2nd ed.). Calcutta:
University of Calcutta.
Tripathi, Snigdha (ed.) (1997). Inscriptions of Orissa,
Vol. 1: Circa Fifth-Eighth Centuries ad. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass.
 a. Kotalipada Copperplate Inscription of the Time of
Dvādaśāditya, Year 14, obverse
(Courtesy: Bangladesh National Museum)

b. Kotalipada Copperplate Inscription of the Time of

Dvādaśāditya, Year 14, reverse
(Courtesy: Bangladesh National Museum)

c. Kotalipada Copperplate Inscription of the Time of

Dvādaśāditya, Year 14, seals
(Courtesy: Bangladesh National Museum)

P L A T E 18