________________
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
(VOL. XXVIII
While introducing the verse, the learned editor remarks that it 'summarises the contents of the grant mentioning once more the names of the grantor, the grantee, the village granted and the time of the grant'. Continuing, the learned editor says: "Since the donee speaks of himself in the first person in this verse, it may be well doubted whether it really formed part of the original record. In copper-plate charters, we do not usually come across the phenomenon of the donee himself stating at the end that he had got the grant from such and such a king on such and such an occasion. It would appear that the last verse was probably composed by the donee himself and added in the space available at the bottom of the plate". The learned editor, as a matter of fact, is convinced of this state of affairs, as has been evinced by himself in the course of drawing & contrast between this Charter A and Charter D of the series. There, he points to the fish emblem that occurs at the end of the record instead of on its seal, and comments: "In a way it is no doubt a better method to prevent additional matter being interpolated in the documents in the space lying vacant at the end of the record, as was done by the grantee of Charter A. The seal emblem on the ring does not prevent such a tampering with the original record".
Now, there are certain considerations that not only do not favour the conclusion arrived at by the learned editor, but positively discredit it. In the first place, the verse in question does not show any hidden motive behind it which would prompt a tampering with the original. Secondly, having no reason to the contrary, we may credit the donee with sense enough to know that any such interference on his part would only go against him, nay, would even annul the grant, legally speaking. These two considerations preclude the possibility of attributing to the grantee any bungling of the suspected sort. It may, however, further be observed that, as shown above, after the so-called interpolated verse comes the date which the learned editor evidently does not take as a part of the interpolation. Since the date occurs nowhere else in the record and he has accepted it as authentic, it may be inferred that he considers the date portion as a part of the original document itself. It follows therefore that the engraver incised the date at the extreme end on the right, leaving on the left a blank just enough to accommodate an Aryā to be inserted later on by the donee, so to say. Here again an element of improbability! Supposing that, after finishing the verse in line 44, the engraver had only the date portion left to be engraved, a more natural course for him would have been either to commence the next line by engraving the very date or to engrave it somewhere in the centre, leaving some space unengraved on either side. Even granting that the insertion of the date is also the doing of the donee, the evidence of the handwriting is strongly against the interpolation theory. It may be seen from the illustration that there is absolutely no difference in the duct of writing between the last line of the record and the rest of it, whereas in the event of any addition by the donee some difference in bandwriting was bound to show itself. In the Sone East-Bank copper plate of Indradēva and Udayarāja, we have a clear instance of an interpolation by one of the donees, where the difference in handwriting is as obvious as the object of the interpolator is manifest."
So far as the practice of summarising the contents of a grant at the end is concerned, there is nothing strange about it, though it is not of a frequent occurrence. In a way, it occurs again in charters D, E and F of the series. The same is found in certain other records as well. It would no doubt have been very unusual if, in the present instance, it had been done by the donee himself, as the learned editor believes it has been. According to him, the verse mentions inter alia the name of the grantee. This is not true. Further on, however, he makes himself clear by
Ibid., p. 198. * Ibid., p. 212.
Ibid., Vol. xxm, pp. 223, 230 and n. 1, plato facing p. 228. fbid., Vol. XXVI, p. 217, text line 44; p. 222, text lines 35-36; p. 226, text linee 38-39. For example, see ibid., Vol. XXII, p. 191.
