By Atul Kumar Agarwala and Bernhard Kölver, Kiel
1. Introduction and Summary
§ 1. Among the holdings of the /?äj'as<Ääw. /S<ofe ^rcÄwc«. Udaipur, there
is a considerable number of copper-plate grants from the Mähäränäs'
former possessions: the inventory lists more than a thousand. The ear¬
liest among them dates from 1418 in an era called samata'. If this is Vi¬
krama, which is the normal Räjasthän reckoning, this is surprisingly
early, well before the fall of Chitor and the foundation of Udaipur itself
The collection thus bears an eloquent testimonial to the Mähäränäs'
well-known historical interest.
This wealth of materials, extending over many centuries and coming
from a principality which resisted Islamic domination and always prid¬
ed itself on its Hindu orthodoxy, of course promises first-hand informa¬
tion about the administrative notions which governed a Hindu state.
For this reason alone, the collection seemed well worth closer study.
The authorities permitted us to take a reasonable number of photo¬
graphs'. The earliest specimens of course were the most attractive, not
only because of their presumed intrinsic interest, butalso because a fair
niunber among them was dated from the same year, samata 1444: we
expected them to use a standard formula, with variations confined to
the particulars of the case. And indeed the plates selected, 37 in all,
tumed out to follow quite a rigid pattem: there could be no doubt they
recorded what was conceived and executed as a standard transaction.
' It names the Maharana Mokal, who according to the accepted chronology
died in A.D. 1433. For the problems of chronology, see below, § 6ff.
^ Through the good offices of Capt. Aja Singh, H.S.H. the Mähäränä kindly had the permission to look at the copperplates obtained for us. Both they and the Director ofthe Archives, Dr. N. M. Mathur, who assisted us in every conceiv¬
able way, have put us under a great obligation.
§ 2. Closer inspection, though, revealed a number of peculiarities.
(1) Variations. Within the framework ofa standardized text, the
plates show a veritable host of minor variations, bewildering especially
in view of the fact that their greatest part professes itself to have been
issued under the authority of one and the same pacoli, named Kasana-
läla: in theory, there was every reason to think he would have seen to
technical and formal uniformity being maintained. This is not the case:
the orthography is sloppy, and grammatical variations ofthe kind illus¬
trated in § 10, below, need a good deal of imagination to be reconciled
with the notion of a formalized language, such as one would expect a
Court to use in its deeds.
(2) Formal Problems. Second, the materials contain some features
which are decidedly odd in view of their early date.
(a) For one thing, there is a formal detail. As the specimen on Plate I
shows, the grants have a conspicuous, even flashy beginning: their
second and third lines are written in an enlarged style, a symbol and
a two-aksara word occupying nearly their entire width. The emblem of
the second line is the lance which the copperplates show ever since
Chonda, Mokal's elder brother', who renounced his right to the throne,
'reserving, as the recompense of his renunciation, the first place in the
councils, and stipulating that in all grants ofthe vassals ofthe crown,
his symbol (the lance) should be superadded to the autograph of the
prince. In all grants the lance of Salumbar* still precedes the monogram of the Rana.''*
What might be called a 'monogram' is indeed shown by all the Udai¬
pur plates we filmed, in the shape of the word sahi, a kind of endorse¬
ment, and its appearance in this place and time is odd. The Vir Vinod,
this careful and well-informed early 19th century compilation of Mewar
history, says the sign was used since the reign of Sangram Singh*. He
ascended the throne only in V.S. 1565 (A.D. 1509), i. e. well after the ear¬
liest batch of more than fifty plates — none of which lacks the sign said
to have been introduced only something like a century later.
' First published in Tod's Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, i, p. 235
(James Tod: Annalu and Antiquities of Rajasthan. Ed. by William Crooke.
Vol. 1-3. Reprint. Delhi 1971.)
* i.e. the place of residence of the chief of the Chondawat clans.
Tod: Annals and Antiquities, loc.cit., i, p. 324.
* Syämaldäsa: hihäs Vir Vinod, (Udaipur, no date), p. 310.
(b) Second, there are occasional loan words from the Islamic tradi¬
tion, two recurrent ones appearing in crucial places of the formalism
and its technicalities, viz., dasagata, i.e. dastkhat, for 'signature', and
the administrative unit the plates give as mavuda, mayuda. It took us
some time to realize it was meant to render maujä—a, guess now happily
confirmed'. The same Mokal who is named as the donor ofthe V.S. 1432
plate here edited as Document I (which defines a mavuda in line 6) also
had the donation of V.S. 1485** written: it records the donation of a 'vil¬
lage with extended boundaries' {dhanapuram ucitam grämam äyämisi-
mam, line 50), where he uses the Sanskrit term. To be sure, this is an
inscription written in Sanskrit, and written in verse, and thus does not
conclusively prove some form of maujä did not then exist as an adminis¬
trative term: but general reflections ofthis kind are not really sufficient
to allay doubts; V.S. 1432 is early for a Muslim loan to appear in Mewar.
(3) Dates. With this inscription, one as it were incidentally touches
upon what tums out to be the thorniest problem of all. This is the dates
attested in the plates. As will be shown in §§ 4-6, they cannot be fitted
into accepted Mewar chronology for the fifteenth and sixteenth centu¬
ries — a chronology which, though perhaps not absolutely certain in
every detail, yet rests on reasonably solid grounds.
§ 3. In various formal respects, then, i. e. in grammar, formalism, termi¬
nology, and chronology, the plates resisted all our attempts to fit them
into a system and to relate them to the evidence available from other
sources. At the end, there was only one solution left: they are fabrica¬
tions.
The existence of forged copper-plates from Räjasthän is a matter of
common knowledge. Even so, our specimens from the Udaipur collec¬
tions are noteworthy by virtue of their very scale. This allows internal
comparison of a uniform if spurious corpus, which tells us something
about the forgers' methods and deficiencies and thus makes for greater
certainty in ultimately rejecting the historical evidence they seem to
attest to.
' Ratan Lal Mishba: Epigraphical Studies of Rajasthan Inscriptions. Delhi
1990: Inscr. No. 67 [dated V.S. 1639], line 2: mauje (p. UO); Mishra's brief
English summaries of 18th century copperplates occasionally employ the term
('Mauza, Mauja': No.s 117-119, 121, 122 etc., pp. 128ff.; texts not given).
^ Edited by Franz Kielhorn: Chitorgadh Stone Inscription of Mokala of
Mewad. The Vikrama Year 1485. In: Epigraphia Indica 2 (Calcutta 1894), pp.
408-421.
21 ZDMG 142/2
Such technical questions apart, their very number raises quite a dif¬
ferent issue, viz., the occasion for producing the counterfeits. A single
fake is individual greed; it can be dated only by a stroke of luck. Forge¬
ries by the dozen or more, all remarkably uniform in style and wording
and execution, rather suggest a definite historical situation where such
documents stood a fair chance of passing for genuine: one does not go
to the trouble of training artisans — and in their quantity the plates
suggest a very manufacture — without the prospect of their being
honoured". —
A treatment of such fabrications of course poses problems of its own.
A presentation of largish sections would seem beside the point. Thus,
we shall confine ourselves to the essentials of the argument. A first sec¬
tion will touch upon the two points which give the clearest indication of
the spurious nature of the grants, i.e. the dates and the vagaries in
orthography and morphology. Then, in a section to some extent specu¬
lative, we shall dwell upon what was a possible occasion ofthe forgeries,
and the rights the forgers sought to obtain. The texts and translations of
three specimen plates are appended.
2. Dates
§ 4. The Occasion of the Donations: Solar Eclipses
With two exceptions, all plates record donations which their text says
are motivated by solar eclipses. Such times when the sun was 'seized'
by Rähu (süryagrahana) were considered occasions boding ill. This was
countered by propitiatory and expiatory acts, donations of lands to
brahmans being prominent among them: the greatest part of Vijayana¬
gar grants, e. g. were occasioned by eclipses. The plates seem to show
Mewar following the same tradition.
§ 5. There is a flaw to this conclusion, though: their dates correspond to
actual eclipses in a manner less than perfect.
(1) A first peculiarity is obvious at a glance. Solar eclipses of course
occur only on the day of the New Moon. The Udaipur plates recording
donations because of eclipses seem to be distributed at random over the
^ Gopinath Sarmä: Räjasthän kä itihäsa. Delhi 1973, does discuss forged
copper-plate grants from Räymal's time (p. 262); he takes them to indicate Räy- mal's reign was a troubled period, i.e. regards them as sixteenth rather than nineteenth-century forgeries.
half-month and the year. To be sure, most of them come from the bright
half of the month, which carries an authenic ring at least to a most
casual inspection: since lunar eclipses fall on the day of the Full Moon, a
date from the dark half of the month might prima facie have been taken
to refer to them. —
With one important exception (see § 6.3), the relation ofthe dates to
actual eclipses can ordy be called tenuous.
The facts are assembled in the following table.
No of Date Commencement Preceding
Plate"* of V.S. Month" Eclipse on"
A 1418 srävana su 15 July 3, 1361 May 5, 1361
B 1431 vaisäkha su 2 April 12, 1374 Mar. 14, 1374
C 1432 vaisäkha su 15 [no donation at eclipse]
D 1433 kärttika su 13 Oct. 13, 1376 July 17, 1376
E 1442 kärttika su 2 Oct. 4, 1385 Aug. 6, 1385
Fl -7 1444 vaisäkha su 2 April 18, 1387 Dec. 22, 1386
G 1444 vaisäkha su 7 April 18, 1387 Dec. 22, 1386
H 1444 äsvina su 3 Sept. 13, 1387 June 16, 1387
11- ■2 1444 äsvina su 13 Sept. 13, 1387 June 16, 1387
Jl- -2 1444 mägha su 2 Jan. 9, 1388 Dec. 11, 1387
Table 1: Dates of Earliest Plates and Closest Solar Eclipses
One sees there are sizeable intervals between the supposed occasion
and actual dates. No pair tallies, the gap amounting to anything be¬
tween less than a month (B) up to nearly four (F. G). One could of course
object the grant as actually issued on the copperplate necessarily post¬
dates the act of donation. But on the background of normal Hindu prac¬
tice, this is an argument of doubtful validity. For a grant usually is effec¬
tive from the date of the donor's resolve or decision (sarnkalpa) and the
ceremonies ensuing, while the time of producing its actual and tangible
record is a secondary and technical matter. — Of course one caimot con-
The documents are designated by A-J plus a figure, the letters standing for
different dates, according to the present table. Documents bearing the same
date are distinguished by numbers, e.g. F6. J2.
'' Days according to L. D. Swamikannu Pillai: Indian (Chronology. Reprint.
New Delhi, Madras 1982, Table X.
" This date and the following according to Th. v. Oppolzer: Canon der Fin¬
sternisse. Wien 1887. (Denkschriften der Kais. Adad. d. Wiss., Math.-Nat. Cl., 52.)
21'
fidently claim Mewär in this respect followed normal practice. But the
discrepancies between eclipses and dates of issue are decidedly
strange.
(2) At this point, one begins to consider another circumstance which
may be significant. A disproportionately high number in the present
corpus dates from vaisäkha sukla 2. This was the second day ofthe New
Year. Now there are analogous instances where grants or appointments
were made or renewed at the beginning ofthe year". If Mewär followed
this practice, we could (a) account for the frequency this day was cho¬
sen, and (b) explain the irregularity of eclipses. Some knowledgeable
man behind the forgers would have known vaisäkha sukla 2 was a likely
date for grants and therefore used this date, while at the same time he
continued to employ a formula which actually named another likely
motive for donations, viz., eclipses.
§ 6. The Era
The figures the plates give for the year of issue raise problems which
are more disturbing. The era normally used in Räjasthän during the
period in question was Vikrama samvat, and the term samata the plates
use at least does not conflict with this assumption. But its application
leads to considerable problems in that it upsets the traditional chrono¬
logy of Mewär rulers.
(1) If they are Vikrama, the dates of the present corpus conflict with all
other evidence. For the relevant period the facts are as follows'*:
Last certain date for Laksasimha: V.S. 1475
First date for his son Mokal: V.S. 1478
This means Mokal and Räymal, the donors of the present deeds, are
separated by at least 42 years, according to traditional reckoning.
(2) As against this, the random choice of copper-plates from Udaipur
names Mokal in grants from 'samata' 1418, 1431, 1432, and 1433, and
Cf Documents from tiie Rudravarna-Mahävihära, Pätan. 1. Sedes and mort¬
gages. Ed. and transi. by B. Kölver and H. Säkya. St. Augustin 1985, p. 78.
'* The figures according to N. P. Chakravarti: Rajaprasasti Inscription from
Udaipur. In: Epigraphia Indica 30 (1958), Appendix, p. 122.
Last date of Mokal: V.S
First date for his son, Kumbha: V.S
Last date of Kumbha: V.S
Ascension of his son Udä, the parricide: V.S
Ascension of his successor, Räymal: V.S
1485/86 1488 1515/18 1525 1530
Räymal for 1442 and 1444. Both from a relative and an absolute point of
view, these dates raise unsurmountable problems. Relative: it is now
nine years only which lie between Mokal's last and Räymal's earliest
plate: not nearly enough for Kumbha and Udä. And the figures as they
stand are just as confusing: which could be the era they employ? Vik¬
rama is an obvious impossibility: they are too early. So, a fortiori, is
saka.
A scholar from Kota was not unaware ofthe problem and said accord¬
ing to his guru the solution was to be sought in an Ananta era, otherwise
apparently unknown (: he did not quote a reference, nor could he relate
its commencement to Vikrama or any other era) . As a simple calcula¬
tion shows, this is a possibility more than doubtful. For one thing, the
introduction of a new era always was counted a major event in history,
attended as it was with a general remission of debts, etc.: one would
not expect an occasion of such magnitude to leave no trace in public
memory or, more significantly, to be passed over in silence by this
monurhental compilation of Mewär history, the Vir Vinod'^.
Apart from such general considerations, there are more specific
grounds to question the pandit's assumption.
Räymal. — The two dates we have for Räymal tally neither vrith
Mokal's nor with the supposed commencement of the Ananta reckoning
as just established. He ascended the throne in V.S. 1530. If the earliest
among the new plates (dated 1442) had been issued in this very year,
this would mean the supposed Ananta began in V.S. 88, i.e. A.D.31.
Among Indian eras, there seems to be none to fit the case.
Mokal. — According to the grid given in § 6.1, Mokal must have ascend¬
ed the throne between V.S. 1475 (the last date ofhis father) and 1478
(when he was first named) ; he did not reign later than 1488 (Kumbha's
first date). Among the plates we filmed, he is first named in 1418, and
last in 1433. (We note in passing that according to these figures, his
reign lasted a minimum of 15 years while according to traditional
reckoning it could not have been longer than 13.) The supposed Ananta
era, then, would have started in a year between (1475-1418, i.e.) 57
and (1478-1418, i. e.) 60 years after Vikrama. We reach a rather similar
figure when departing from the year of Kumbha's accession (presuming
this was also the year of Mokal's death): 1488 minus 1433 (: Mokal's
1.241 ff. it discusses the question of eras at considerable detail, without an
Ananta reckoning being mentioned. — One wonders whether it owes its exis¬
tenee to some hazy recollection of the Ananda year in the Jupiter cycle.
last appearance in our plates) would yield 55 if the plate had been
issued in Kumbha's first year, shghtly more if issued earlier.
(3) At this point, an awful suspicion begins to raise its head. Among the
known eras which begin in this range, there is one indeed which actually
does answer. This is the Christian one, A.D. There seems to be no alter¬
native if we are to accept the new dates for Mokal at their face value.
The implications are appalling. The plates cannot but be forgeries,
and their dates were fabricated by some scholarly individual who drew
his knowledge from an account of Mewär history which used the Chris¬
tian reckoning — i.e., presumably, a source written in English. On the
face of it, this would not seem downright impossible: the Vir Vinod,
e. g., was written to counterbalance and respond to British accounts'*. —
The figures 1418, 1431, 1432, 1433, the dates the plates ascribe to
Mokal, all fall within the A.D. range Tod's Annals and Antiquities give
for him".
This is not the full story yet: the supposed Räymal plates add what in
a sense is another turn of the screw.
The largest single group among them dates from vaisäkha sukla, 1444:
seven from its second and one from its seventh day. Now there was a
solar eclipse on April 17 of A.D. 1501, i.e. on the New-Moon day of
Vaisäkha, and it is the clue to the whole set.
One notes this year is separated by 57 from the date as given in the
document; and adding another 57 one arrives at Vikrama 1558 when
Räymal was actually ruling over Mewär'*.
§ 7. Witb this date, the procedure ofthe forgers becomes quite clear.
Somebody consulted a souree giving the dates of Mewär rulers in
Christian reckoning. For Räymal, a candidate possibly chosen because
his donations to Ekalihganätha'" — or the name of his pacoli — were
known, he found the figures 1473 to 1508 or 1509. He furthermore knew
vaisäkha sukla 2, and the days immediately after a solar eclipse, were
'* viz., Col. Tod's Annals and Antiquities of Räjasthän. See the Vir Vinod, 1.181-184, where Syämaldäs tells how, at the suggestion ofthe Political Agent, the Mähäränä Sambhü Singh entrusted him with the task of writing the history
of Mewär. — The Vir Vinod occasionally quotes and refutes Tod.
" Their first volume was published in 1829. The eonstehation, though, where
the forgeries made sense arose somewhat earlier: see § 8.
'* There were no solar eclipses on the new moon of both Vikrama 1444 and
1558.
'° See the Vir Vinod, 1.352.
plausible dates. To find a suitable year obviously was a task for a person
versed in astronomy: so the problem was handed over to someone with
this background.
The astronomer began his calculations, duly converting the years into
the Vikrama era. He must have found within the predetermined scope
there were five years which met the specifications required, viz., Vi¬
krama 1531, 1540, 1550, 1558, and 1559, i.e. A.D. 1474, 1483, 1493,
1501, and 1502. These results went back to the master-mind behind the
forgeries.
For whichever reason, he chose the year 1501. Of course he knew Vi¬
krama started 57 years earlier than A.D. But everybody knows 'earlier'
means 'minus', not 'plus': so he had to subtract. This, then, is what he
did. And having thus exerted all imaginable care, he prepared his
manuscript (in an oldish style of writing, too) , and mapped it onto a cop¬
per-plate, and had the coppersmith execute the results of his labours.
3. The Occasion of the Forgeries
§ 8. Why such large-scale forgeries? forgeries, moreover, whose consis¬
tencies of style, eccentricities, and persistent mistakes suggest a com¬
mon origin and occasion? What we can offer is but a speculative solu¬
tion. It hinges upon the fact that the Christian era, and modifications
derived from it, is the only reckoning which allows us to cope with the
irregularities in dates. This means the plates must stem from a period
when British influence had begun to make itself felt in Räjasthän; it
narrows the search down to some constellation in or after the late
eighteenth century.
During its latter third, Mewär had fallen into utter chaos: In his
Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, Colonel Tod proves himself a sym¬
pathetic and eloquent witness to these troubled times. He very graphi¬
cally describes the devastations wrought by the Mahratta wars between
1811 and 1814, dwelling upon depopulation and the decay of agricul¬
ture and the economy"*. A wide-spread um-est made itself felt, chiefly
directed against the oppressive rule of the Mähäränäs and their feudato¬
ries. This is when the British began to appear on the scene. Since then,
appeals to them apparently could be considered a means to redress
Tod: Annals and Antiquities, loc.cit., i, p. 546.
wrongs. Here is the text of a 'remonstrance ofthe Sub-vassals of Deo¬
garh against their chief, Rawat Gokul Das', alas undated:
' Since you [i.e., Jamed Tod] entered Mewar, lands long lost have been
recovered. What crimes have we committed that at this day we should
lose ours?'"
Only when the pax Britannica-w&s imposed (i.e. from January 1818)
did the state regain normalcy. The restoration entailed extensive resti¬
tutions of confiscated lands. Tod himself documents this process.
Among the relevant documents he translated, the following extract is of
particular significance in the present context:
Siddh Sri Maharana Dhiraj, Maharana Bhim Singh, to all the nobles my
brothers and kin. Rajas, Patels, Jhalas [. . .] etc. etc.
Now, since S. 1822 (A..D. 1776), during the reign of Sri Ari Singhji, when the troubles commenced, laying ancient usages aside, undue usurpations of the land having been made: therefore, on this day, Baisakh Badi 14, S. 1874 (A.D. 1818), the Maharana assembling ah his chiefs, lays down the path of duty in new ordinances.
1st. All lands belonging to ttie crown obtained since tfie troubles, and all lands seized by one chief Jrom another, shall be restored. [. . .]'^^
In other words, the restoration was codified in A.D. 1818, and it
expressly stipulated restitution of confiscated lands.
4. Kind of Grant
§ 9. Which raises the question ofthe rights in land the forgers sought to
obtain. Since the meaning ofthe crucial term, nimasima, remains to be
determined, it will be useful to begin with general observations. The
plates lack two pieces of information usually found in comparable
grants.
None of them defines the plot in question: neither do we find bound¬
aries mentioned nor are there names which could be designations of
plots. This can only mean it is not land itself which is being granted, but
some kind of income derived from it. Second, there is no mention of a
person or institution the granted income was to be collected from. This,
then, went without saying, which means there must have been an estab¬
lished routine, i. e. an ofiicial on the local level whom such grants could
be presented to, and who would make corresponding payments accord¬
ing to current rates.
^' loc. cit., p. 230 flf.
Tod: Annals and Antiquities, loc.cit., i, p. 243 f (itahcs mine — B.K.).
The texts, however, do refer to an administrative framework which
can accommodate these assumptions. Apparently, the lands under the
Mähäränä's control were subdivided into 'townships' {*nigama: see
below, p. [20]) and 'villages' with their registers {*mauzä: below,
p. [20]). One would expect them to have been handled by a functionary
like a Patwari, and it would be either he or his equivalent on the nigama
level who actually disbursed payments.
In all probability, the term nimasima stems from this context. Unfor¬
tunately, it admits of different interpretations, sima no doubt is the
Sanskrit word simä 'boundary' (though the Räjasthäni sabad kos^^
glosses it by '1. jungle; 2. field (khety, it was used in the conventional sense in Mokal's authentic inscription from V.S. 1485'").
For nima, there are two options. The nearest plausible etymon from
NIA languages would seem to be Hindi niv 'foundation', derived from
skt. nemi- 'felly, circumference'. In a sense, this is the same semantic
field as simä, and the term would look like a hendiadyoin: one could
imagine 'circumference (or 'foundation') (and) boundary' to mean
something like 'the plot granted plus whatever was found on it in the
way of trees, buildings etc.'. There is an obvious problem, though, about
this meaning: the boundaries are not defined, and one does not really
see how such general instructions could have been carried out, unless
there actually existed cadastral lists which defined each plot by name.
In this case one would of course expect to see these names of plots in the
documents — which, as has been noted, is not the case.
Thus one is driven to consider a second possibility; nima can be the
Persian loan, 'half, which actually found its way into Indian adminis¬
trative terminology'^. If so, the term would mean 'half field' — a percen¬
tage which actually is attested for Mewar"* — and the levy 'including'
(svdi) which the land was given would belong to the class which in older
sources goes under the name of deya- 'to be given'" or pinddaJcara-
{K&utaly a,)/pindafka)- (Nepalese palm-leaf deeds). In contradistinction
to the usual proportionate tax upon proceeds of the land, i. e. the har¬
vest, this levy consisted of a fixed sum due every year, and this sum,
SiTÄRÄM Lä;.as: Räjasthärnni sabad kos, 1-4. Jodhpur, no date.
^* See above, note 8.
Cf. H. H. Wilson: A Glossary of Judicial and Revenue Terms [. . .], s.v.
'" The V.S. 1856 pillar ofthe Town of Great Akola in Col. Tod's version stipu¬
lates '[. . .] to erect the pillar promising never to exact above half the proceduce of the crops' (Annals and Antiquities i, p. 240). An instance ofa remission of 50% of a levy (: transit duties) is mentioned ibid., p. 239.
" Thus in the Silähära inscriptions.
either whole or in part'**, was frequently used by the Royal Court to
reward services or finance religious donations. — As the term nimasima
seems to say, Mewär apparently employed what was a considerable
administrative improvement in the way this levy was handled: they
used A fixed percentage to be given to grantees. From the word sudi one
would gather this was the rate which normally went to the state and in
the case ofthe donations was also included in the grant, over and above
the proportionate land tax.'" This looks like a derivation from the 'quit- rent' payments which were current in Räjasthän'".
It would then be crown lands being transferred to the grantees, and
the grant would include an exemption, entire or partial, from the usual
rent which went to the state. —
One would like to know whether the fraud actually worked. The gent¬
lemen were a bit greedy, perhaps". But the very number ofthe plates
indicates they thought they stood a chance: for just a test, there are too
many by far. And there is the fact that they stem from what was the
Mähäränä's collection: why should they be there, rather than with pos¬
sessors of the lands granted? It would make sense if they had been
honoured, and replaced by newer copies reflecting the changes in admi¬
nistrative practice and format.
In the Kathmandu Valley, it was various percentages of this levy which
were bestowed upon grantees. 20% or one of its multiples seem to have been
current. From the Nepalese documents accessible, the system looks complicated and unwieldy — which may be the reason why it eventually came to be abolished:
I have not seen it mentioned subsequent to N.S. 424, i.e. A.D. 1304.
One notes in passing this system again implies agricultural units of equal yield, rather than of equal area. This is of course how the fiigrÄä was handled: see Wilson: A Glossary of Judicial and Revenue Terms [. . .], s.v.
See Tod: Annals and Antiquities, loe.cit., i, p. 576 etc.
^' The sheer quantity ofthe lands donated is surprising. Thirteen plates dated 1444 amount to a total of more than 2600 bigtiäs; the seven from the bright half of Vaisäkha alone run to 1770. There are veritable latifundia among them: 800, 400-1-300, 400, 300 bighds e&oh. The Udaipur Räjaprasasti does not credit Mokal or Räymal with any particular liberality. The editor, though, refers to a tradition
which may have contributed to pious deeds being attributed to Räymal: He is
credited with having installed the Caturmukhalihga, and one of his inscriptions 'is found at Ekalihgaji'.
5. Appendix: Texts
By way of an illustration, we give the texts of three plates. They will
do well enough to demonstrate the uniformity of style, general appear¬
ance, and formalism.
This limited selection, however, will not give an adequate idea of the
amount of variation of detail, which is so much of an obstacle as long as
one takes the plates for genuine. It is of course an essential part ofthe
overall picture, and we illustrate it by means of a few specimens which
draw upon the records listed in Table 1. In making our selections, we
have confined ourselves to items unlikely to prove controversial.
§ 10. Variations
The wording ofthe plates is remarkably constant — as one would expect
from standardized formulas. But within this established narrow frame
one finds variations in spelling and grammar in considerable profusion,
some of them due to what can only be called a surprising lack of care,
with dovmright mistakes even in titles and names where one would
hardly expect them to be tolerated. We list some instances ofthis, using
a subdivision into orthographical and grammatical; this of course is to
some extent arbitrary.
(1) Orthographical aniri" : aniri" F3.
asoja : [ajseja ff' , äseja II.
ekaliganäta, the name ofthe deity : "ligannätaFS. akaliga"^^ B. Fl. : aka- liganätha F7. yeka" F6.
karasi : kasi F2.
kasanaläla, the name of the pacoli : kasasanalMa Fl.
janiro : janiro J2.
nimasima : nämasima F3.
pacoli : pacali F2. F6. FT. J3. : pacali F5 : paceli D. Jl. : pace H. : pali F4.
barämanaB. Fl. : bämanaA. F2. G. : bamanaD. F4. F5. F6. F7. Jl. J2.
bigä : biga D. F2. F6. H.
besäka : basäka C. F2. F3. F5. F7. G.
For the Key to Abbreviations, see note 10.
For aka", see S. H. Kellogg: A Grammar of the Hindi Language. London 1983', § 216: akotara etc.
mavuda B. D. E.: mayrada Fl. F31 G? 11. : mavradra\2. : mavfrJdaHI :
mapuda F4. Jl.
mähäränä : mähäränä B. C. Fl. : märänä A.
räma : ramä Fl.
(2) Grammatical
1) 'a copper-plate has been made' appears in the following forms, here
arranged in reverse alphabetical order:
tabäpatara karadi da F6 (*''')
tähapatara karedi da F7 {*)
täyapatara karedi da F2 ("")
tabäfpajvara karedi dä Jl (*)
tähapatara karadi di F5 (*)
täjhjäpatara karadi di E (*)
tabäpatara karädi di D
taprapatara karodßj dßj F4 (*)
täbäpatara karadi do B. C. F3. 12 (*)
bäpatara^^ karadi do Fl (*)
tabäpatara karedi do II (*)
tabäpatara karedo do 12 (*)
[missing] H (*)
2) arapana plus
karadi da F2 (*). F6 (*)
karedi da F7 {*)
karadi d[ä] F5 (*). G (*)
karadi di B. C. D. Fl (*). F3. 12 (*)
karedi dßJ F4 (*). H (*). II (*)
karada dfoj E (*)
karodi dfoJ J2 (*)
3) Pronouns
3.1. Demonstrative Pronoun, genitives:
('of this', referring to Hämrapattra, dependent on i^e etc.)
[The 19th century Mewari stems are ani, itii, i; see Kellogg, loc.cit..
Table X]
The quotations marked by an asterisk are from documents which name one
and the same official, viz., Kasanaläla. His endings, then, provide us with a goodish part of the whole gamut.
No gap before bä.
Stem ana+ ra+ kfoj E (*)
Stem ani+ rä+ ka F5 (*). Jl (*)
-I- ri+ ka D. F6 (*). F7 (*)
-I- kä F2. F3 (anin"). H (*)
+ ke F4 (*). II (*)
-I- ko B. C. Fl (*). G {*). 12 (*)
+ ro+ ke J2 (*)
3.2. Relative Pronoun, genitives:
('of which', referring to arapana, dependent on Hämrapattra)
[Mewari stems: jani-Zjirn + -ko/-ro/-lo [Kellogg, loc.cit.. Table XI]
Stem jana+ rä E (*)
Stem jani+ ra D. F4 (*). F6 ("*)
-I- rä B. F2 {*)
+ re II (*). Jl (*)
-I- ro C. J2 (*) (janiro)
Stem jä + j-o G (*)
Stem ji + kä F5 (*)
-I- ko F6 (*)
-I- rä 12 (*)
-I- ro Fl (*)
Discrepancies of this kind and profusion can hardly be fitted into the
usual notions about a reasonable scope for variation even if attributed
to a (hypothetical) unsettled state of the written language, or to dia¬
lects: and any supposition ofthis type is of course seriously weakened
by the fact that so many of them are attributed to one and the same issu¬
ing official. — First, there is lack of care: even so, one wonders how it
could come to include the name ofthe god, ofthe ruler, his official, and
of the document itself Second, there are quite a few variants which are
due to palaeographical reasons: i and o when joined to consonants are
not much differentiated from ä, and we have the same uncertainty about
e/a. But even if one was to ignore them as cases of an insufficient mark¬
ing of minimal distinctions, there still remains enough in the way of
deviations to defy all attempts to establish a coherent grammatical sys¬
tem. —
§11. Three Plates
In some respects, an edition of such materials is a doubtful exercise,
the plates reflecting nothing but what nineteenth-century forgers
thought could be passed off as an old Mewär document. Yet the techni¬
que of the forgers is not without an interest of its own.
As has been said, what is perhaps chiefly remarkable is their careless¬
ness. To be sure, they reproduced the most conspicuous features of
Mewär grants, viz., the second and third lines, i.e. the lance, which
derives from the Salumbar chieftains, and the word sahi 'being the sign-
manual of the prince'**. But once the reader has passed beyond them,
mistakes and inconsistencies abound. Still, when going by the sheer
number of the forgeries, one would think they served their purpose:
droves of people had them made, which they would have hardly done
unless they counted on the chance of passing them off for genuine.
Which means the routine for examining them must have been alto¬
gether ineffective. Of course, the dates were cleverly chosen in that they
preceded the fall of Chitor: the Udaipur Palace will not have possessed
so many genuine pieces available for comparison.
Apart from the irregularities illustrated in § 10, there are a few pecu¬
liarities and downright errors which keep recurring in what is no negli¬
gible part of the corpus. Such are the changes of position ofthe relative
and demonstrative pronoims in i secala karasi jina . . . pugasi instead of
jina . . . karasi i . . . pugasi, the sequence one would expect; such is the
constant na" in the spelling of nagama, ruujäma, without a single in¬
stance of such is the odd spelling mavuda etc. for maujä. Taken to¬
gether, they lead one to consider the possibility of a single prototype
to all the forgeries whicb presumably achieved its purpose and thus
formed the model for extensive activities on the part ofthe forgers*', the
'test case which worked'. The gap in the Township name of Document
III filled by a second hand (see Plate, line 6) would tie in with this hypo¬
thesis: the forger knew the village where he wanted lands, but had not
yet found a reasonable conjecture for its older administrative affiliation
when the plate was made. —
In the transliterations which follow, a few aksaras, marked x, have not
been transcribed, due to the lack of a sufficient number of parallels : any
attempt to interpret them of course suffers from their lack of authen-
*" Tod: Annals and Antiquities, loc.eit., i, p. 235 (there transliterated Sahai).
Actually, it is a kind of endorsement: Sircar renders it as 'correct and approved'
(Indian Epigraphy, Index). — A reproduction ofa grant with lance and sahi is
given in Tod {loc.cit., p. 232).
" No. 51 in the list of Räjasthän documents pubhshed in the Annual Report
on Indian Epigraphy, 1957/58, p. 19 (Ajmer, Rajputana Museum) is an item
which apparently originated under the same conditions: its date, which is given as V.S. 1431, Mägha äu 7, again does not tally with accepted chronology.
ticty, and the aberrations of the Orthographical Variants list clearly
show the difficulties the forgers had in carrying out their task.
I
(Document C)
Text
1 sri rämaji [siMharnf*
2 [lance]
3 sahi
4 safdhja sri mähäränaji sri sri mokalasi
5 gajiko data paradata gusäi parati gara[b]a ra
6 manäti nagäma palfäjsamä mafvjudaka dhara
7 ti bigä 13) [ajsara tarä nima sima sudi
8 sri mähäd[e]vaji arapana karadi di janiro
9 täbäpatara karadi do aniriko i sacala
10 karasi jina sn akaliganäta pugasi
11 samata 1432 rä mati basäka su
12 da 15 dasagata pacälßj munaläla
Translation
The Ven. Räma. Hail!
[Lance]
fsahij
Hail"! Gift (and) donation'' of the Ven. Mähäränä, the Twice Ven.
Mokalasiga, (to) the Gosaim Parati, the Guru''.
In Ramanäti Township'', land of Paläsa Village", 13 bighäs — in let¬
ters: bighä thirteen — including the 'half-field' (levy)'^, have been made
an offering to the Ven. Mahädeva'', of which a copper-plate has been
made. Whoever will make a disturbance to this, him'' the Ven. Ekali¬
ganäta will seize.
Date: Of (the year) samvat 1432, (the month of) Vaisäkha, the 15th
day of the bright half
Signature: The Pacoli, Munaläla.
For the interpretation ofthis symbol, see D. C. Sircar: Indian Epigraphy.
Delhi 1965, pp. 92 f
Notes
" The initial sadha is taken as what usually is siddham or some abbre¬
viation: the word is attested in shortened forms, sdha and sdhi^^. It is
hard to say whether the present instance goes back to the abbreviation,
with the usual anaptyctic vowel that often resolves consonant clusters
(: which would imply survival of a form not really in common use), or is
a variant ofthe normal word, mati (< miti, via the abbreviation mti) fol¬
lowing the year shows a similar development. —
paradata < pradatta-. For the anaptyctic vowel, cf analogies like
dasagata, harämana, arapana, patara etc.; Tessitori § 2,6 (IA 43
(1914), p. 56). -
' garaba, highly conjectural. Among recorded forms, the nearest
approximation is garuva, garuvä. A few examples for medial Apabhr. u
> Western Räj. a are listed in Tessitori § 5 (IA 43 (1914), p. 58). -
nagama (variants: nagäma, negäma) we take to be a variant of skt.
nigama 'township', i.e. the administrative unit including several mavu-
das. For instances ofa development of Apabhr. i > Westem Räj. a, see
Tessitori, § 4 (IA 43 (1914), p. 57). -
mavuda (variants: mauda, mavuda, ma[pjuda): *maujä, village? 'A
Mauzä is defined by authority to be 'a parcel or parcels of land having a
separate name in the revenue records, and of known limits.' Directions
to settlement officers'*". —
' For this translation of nimasima, cf § 9. —
i. e. in the name of M. : donations are usually made in the name of a
family deity. —
The position of the relative and the demonstrative pronoun are
inverted.
Places named Ram and Paläs are recorded in the Rajasthan map of
the National Atlas of India, Sheet 3, Sect. D3.
Cf D. C. Sircar: Select Inseriptions bearing on Indian History and Civiliza¬
tion, vol 1 (Calcutta 1965^), p. 156, and D. C. Sircar: Indian Epigraphy (Delhi 1965), p. 92.
*" H. H. Wilson: A Glossary of Judicial and Revenue Terms [. . .], Delhi 1968^,
II
(Document F7)
Text 1 sri rämaji [siddham]
2 [lance]
3 sahi
4 sadha sri mähäränäji sri sri räyemala
5 jilce data paradata bamana sudara ä
6 daguda varä nagama bagarnda ma[vu]da
7 ka dharati biga 12) asare bärä da
8 di ka' dhaki nima sima sudi suraja
9 parahima ramä arapana karedi da
10 janira täbäpatara karedi da aniri
11 ka ye secala karasi jina sri akali
12 ganätha pugasi samata 1444
13 mati besäka suda 2 dasagata paca
14 ll kasanalälakä
' The downward stroke marking the length of the vowel is not con¬
nected to the horizontal stroke of ka so that, on the face of it, the read¬
ing should rather be transcribed as ka /. The same gap, however, is
also found in mä (mähäränä, line 4), bä (bärä, line 7). See also III, notes 1 and 4.
Translation
The Ven. Räma. Hail
[Lance]
[sahi]
Hail! Gift (and) donation ofthe Ven. Mähäränä, the Twice Ven. Räye¬
mala, (to) the Brähmana Sudara Ädaguda". In Vara Townsliip, land of
Bagainda Village, 12 bighäs — in letters: twelve — in front of what had
been (previously) given, including the 'half-field' (levy), have at the
occasion ofthe solar eclipse been made an offering to Räma', a copper¬
plate of which has been made. Whoever will make a disturbance ofthis,
him the Ven. Ekaliganätha will seize.
Date: (The year) samvat 1444, (the month of) Vaisäkha, the second
day of the bright half
Signature of the Pacoli, Kasanaläla.
22 ZDMG 142/2
Notes
" i. e. Ädagaura, brahmins ofthe Bhäradväja Gotra, cf. the Räjasthäni
sabad kos s.v.
anaphoric, referring to dhärati. cf Hindi di hui kä etc.
" This is the usual formula, rather than that of I. The Mewär rulers
were Süryavamäin and traced their descent from Lava, Räma's son. See
also the invocation of Räma in the first line of the plates.
We have not been able to identify the township, varä. The National
Atlas of India Rajasthan Sheet has a village named Bagor (Sect. D2, SE
of Deogarh) and another one named Bagora (C2, north of Bhinmal).
Baguipra (Sect. C4) is quite far from Udaipur.
m
(Document F2)
Cf the Plate. The beginning of Line 6, up to nagama and including the
place name, Saruvä[da|], shows a different hand.
Text 1 sri rämaji [siddharn]
2 [lance]
3 sahi
4 sadha sri mähäränäji sri sri räyema
5 lajik[ä] data paradata bämana parasaräma
6 garaba [saru]va[dä'] nagama [n]äjaräsä^ ma
7 vudaka dharati bigä 300) a^ara biga
8 tina sa nima sima sudi suraja parabi
9 ma räma arapana karadi da janirä täba
10 patara karedi da anirikä ya secala ka
11 si'' jina sri ekaliganätha pugasi
12 samata 1444 mali bäsäka su
13 da 2 dasagata pacali kasanalä
14 la ka f
' or: [da\J, which one would prefer. The danda may have been added
to fill agap. Note 4 discusses what seems a similar case: but this is a dif¬
ferent scribe. — ' We have no explanation for the small hook preceding
[n]. — * em. karasi. —* ka and the vertical stroke are not connected by a
horizontal line. No doubt kä is intended.
Translation
The Ven. Räma. Hail
[Lance]
[sahi]
Hail! Gift (and) donation of the Ven. Mähäränä, the Twice Ven. Räye¬
mala, (to) the Brähmana, Parasaräma, the Guru (?). In [Saruväda]
Township, land of [N]äjaräsa Village, 300 bighäs in letters: bighäs three
hundred — including the 'half-field' (levy) , have at the solar eclipse been
made an offering to Räma, a copper-plate of which has been made.
Whoever will make a disturbance to this, him the Ven. Ekaliganätha
will seize.
Date: (The year) samvat 1444, (the month of) Vaisäkha, the second
day of the bright half
Signature of the Pacoli, Kasanaläla.
The township of Saruvä[dä] may be what the Räjasthän map of the
National Atlas of India records as Sarwär (Sect. Dl). The Atlas does not
record a likely locality for [Njäjaräsa, though.
Bibliography
Chakravarti, N. P.: Rajaprasati Inscription from Udaipur. In: Epigraphia
Indica 30 (New Delhi 1958), Appendix.
Kellogg, S. H.: A Grammar of the Hindi Language. London 1938^.
Kielhorn, Franz: (Jhitorgadh Stone Inscription of Mokala of Mewad. The
Vikrama Year 1485. In: Epigrapliia Indica 2 (Calcutta 1894), pp. 408-421.
Kölver, Bernhard, and Hemräj Säkya: Documents from the Rudravarna-
Mahäihära, Pätan. 1. Sales and mortgages. Ed. and transi. St. Augustin 1985.
LÄLAS, SItäräm: Räjasthärnni sahad kos. Vol. 1-4. Jodhpur (no date).
Mishra, Ratan Lal: Epigraphical Studies of Rajasthan Inscriptions. Delhi 1990.
Oppolzer, Th. v.: Canon der Finsternisse. Wien 1887. (Denkschriften der Kais.
Adak. d. Wiss., Math.-Nat. CL, 52.)
Sarmä, Gopinäth: Räjasthän kä itihäs. Delhi 1973.
Sircar, Dinesh Chandra: Indian Epigraphy. Delhi 1965.
—: Select Inscriptions bearing on Indian History and CivUization, vol. 1. Calcutta 1965'.
Swamikannu Pillai, L. D.: Indian Chronology. Reprint. New Delhi, Madras
1982.
Syämaldäsa: Itihäs Vir Vinod. (Udaipur, no date). [Reprint Delhi 1986].
Tessitori, L. P.: Notes on the Grammar of the Old Westem Rajasthani with
special referenee to Apabhranga and to Guzarati and Marwari. In: Indian Anti¬
quary 43 (1914), pp. 21ff., 55 ff., 84fr., 181ff., 213fT., 225ff., 245; 44 (1915), pp. 3fr., 30fr., 52ff, 74fr., 96ff, 119ff., 159; 45 (1916), pp. 6ff. 93fr.
22'
Tod, James: Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan. Ed. by William Crooke Vol. 1-3. Reprint. Delbi 1971.
Wilson, Horace Hayman: A Glossary of Judicial and Revenue Terms [. . .]
Delhi 1968^
Plate I Copper-Plate Grant
Dated samata 1444, vaisäkha sukla 2
Räjasthän State Archives, Udaipur
Mahäbhärata 12.326.17-46'
Von Andreas Bock-Raming, Freiburg
Bei dem Text, den ich zum Gegenstand meiner nachfolgenden Unter¬
suchung gewählt habe - Kapitel 326, Vers 17-46 aus dem Säntiparvan
des Mbh — handelt es sich um einen Passus, der dem sog. Näräyaniya
angehört. Bekanntlich wird das insgesamt 19 Adhyäyas umfassende
Näräyaniya als eines der frühesten literarischen Zeugnisse lur die
Religion des Päficarätra-Visnuismus angesehen'. Seine inhaltlichen
Schwerpunkte liegen aufder Verherrlichung Visnu-Näräyanas als höch¬
ster Gottheit, der bhakti zu ihm sowie der Verkündigung seiner Religion.
Dem Inhalt des hier untersuchten Textstückes kommt eine besondere
religionsgeschichtliche Bedeutung zu: Nach Auffassung der bisherigen
Forschung gehört es nämlich zu den ältesten Textstücken, die von der
Entstehung der sog. vyühas handeln. Damit sind vier im Päftcarätra-
Visnuismus gelehrte Manifestationen des höchsten Gottes gemeint, die
Väsudeva, Samkarsana, Pradyumna und Aniruddha heißen. Im ersten
Teil meiner Ausführungen möchte ich nüch mit zwei Fragen befassen:
1. Wie ist dieser Text strukturiert und 2. Welche theologischen Aus¬
sagen enthält er? Zu diesem Zweck habe ich das Gesamtkorpus in sechs
mit den Buchstaben A bis G bezeichnete Teilabschnitte untergliedert,
die im Anhang unter Nr. I wiedergegeben sind.
' Vortrag, gehalten am 11. 4. 1991 auf dem 25. Deutschen Orientalistentag in München.
' Vgl. etwa R. C. Hazra: Studies in ttie Puränic Records on Hindu Rites and Oustoms. Dacca 1940, S. 108; S. Gupta: The Caturvyüha and the Visäkha-Yüpa in the Päncarätra. in: Adyar Library Bulletin 35 (1971), S. 189; W. G. Neevel:
Yamuna's Vedänta and Päncarätra: Interpreting the Classical and the Popular. Mis- sola 1977, S. 8 mit Anm. 24. Allein Schräder: Introduction to the Päncarätra and the Ahirbudhnya-Sarnhitä. Madras 1916, urteilt zurückhaltender: „Our ear¬
liest source of information on the Päncarätra is believed to be the so-called Nära- diya (sic!) section of the Sänti Parvan ofthe Mahäbhärata . . . Moreover the Nä- radiya account does not give the impression of being based on first-hand know¬
ledge ... At any rate, the possibility ofthe existence of Päncarätra-Sarphitäs at and before the time of the Näradiya cannot well be denied" (S. 14-15).
