गुप्त अभिलेख संग्रह (जे. एफ. फ्लीट - गुप्त सम्राटों एवं परवर्ती नरेशों के ऐतिहासिक पाषाण व ताम्रलेख)

expression is of importance, in shewing clearly that the Gupta dynasty and sway were
still continuing, and that the dates of these records are to be referred to the same era
with the dates of the Early Guptas themselves. But there is nothing at all in the expres-
sion, tending to give the era the name of the "Gupta era."
In the Môrbî grant of Jâïnka, again, as read by Dr. R. G. Bhandarkar,¹ we are sup-
posed to have a very clear intimation indeed, that the era was then known as the Gupta
era; his reading and translation being,—paṁch-âśîtyâ yutê=tîtê samânâṁ śata-paṁchakê ।
Gauptê dadâv=adô nṛipaḥ s-ôparâgê=rka-maṇḍalê,—of which a more literal translation than
that given by him, would be "the Gupta fifth century of years, together with eighty-five
(years), having elapsed, the king gave this, when the disc of the sun was eclipsed."
There is a difficulty in disposing finally of the whole bearing of this inscription; for the
reason that the first plate had been lost sight of, before the grant was obtained for
examination at all; as the result of which, the genealogy of Jâïnka is not known; and the
second plate contains no name of a place, unless we are to find it in the verse that I have
quoted. And now, even the second plate also, the published one, has been mislaid,
and is not forthcoming. That the date refers in all probability to the Gupta era, I do not
dispute. But the above reading of it, takes no notice of the fact that the real word, in
line 17, is not gauptê at all, but gôptê; the au being arrived at only by applying again,
as a component of the vowel, a perfectly distinct and separate sign, which is in reality
nothing but the single mark of punctuation after paṁchakê, at the end of the half-verse,
and which had already been properly interpreted as such. It is only by the deliberate
correction of ô into au,² that the name of the Guptas can be introduced into this passage;
but even then the adjective occupies a very inconveniently detached position as regards
the noun, pañchaka, which it qualifies. We might, with just as much reason, correct gôptê
into gôptrê, 'to the protector, i.e. the local governor;' and this would be even more sustain-
able; for the word stands immediately before dadau, 'he gave,' in connection with which
we have every reason to look for a dative, or some other case. Or, again, without any
correction at all, we might translate "the king gave this (charter) at (the village of)
Gôpta." And this, I expect, will be found to be the real meaning, if ever the first plate,
which is said to be now at Gaṅgâsâgar in Bengal, can be obtained for examination. As
matters stand, there is at least nothing in this passage that compels us to connect the
name of the Guptas with the date. And, at the best, even if a future discovery of the
first plate should force us to adopt the reading of Gauptê in the date, the grant belongs
to rather a late period, when, in Kâṭhiâwâḍ and Gujarât, any knowledge of the real origin
of the era must have been lost, and all that remained was that it was the Gupta kings
who had introduced the era into those parts.

---

¹ Ind. Ant. Vol. II. p. 258, line 16 f.
² The mistake of ô for au does occur in the word svavbhânô, for svarbbhânau, in line 3 of the
grant. But in line 9, in the word paurvva, the au is formed quite correctly and completely.