365bet娱乐

There in the 础苍耻艣腻蝉补苍补辫补谤惫补苍 of the 惭补丑腻产丑腻谤补迟补, it is said that purification from sin is possible by awarding only as much land as equal to gocarma (equivalent to cow skin).^[1] 痴颈峁ａ箛耻辫耻谤腻峁嘺 defines it as in the amount of grain being produced from it, one such land will sustain one person for a year.^[2] The interrelationship between land grants and livelihoods is undeniable.

Although the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 had no connection with the production, the necessary resources would come from donations only. These were accepted in the society and were also praised in the scriptures, which were composed of the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. A statement in the 碍补濒颈办腻辫耻谤腻峁嘺 advises the giver to choose eleven 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 from the vedic family. It is suggested further to build a house for them, to decorate the house with cattle, grain, maids, utensils and clothes, and finally to give each one of them a hundred nivartanas of land or half a village or a full village if possible.^[3] But this does not mean that all 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were eligible for charity. Or it is not right to think that only a 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 gets a gift.

How the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 made their living need not be discussed anew. However, the texts written at different times in early India expressed different views about it. In northern India, the idea of 腻辫补诲诲丑补谤尘补 temporarily allows them to make a living through arts and crafts, work for wages, serve others, raise livestock, trade, agriculture, etc. According to 惭补苍耻蝉补峁僪颈迟腻 those who keep and tending cattle, do farming, the templepriests, paid servants of a village or a king, and the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 who subsist by astrology should not be invited to any 蝉谤腻诲诲丑补. ^[4]

The 惭补迟蝉测补辫耻谤腻峁嘺 states from the northern perspective, the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 living in the mlecchha countries^[5] commonly not invited to 蝉谤腻诲诲丑补s. ^[6] Probably, the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 did not follow theserules strictly. 碍腻艣测补辫补 advised the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 not to take part in agriculture personally. He strictly restricted the physical manual labor of the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 under the 艣奴诲谤补蝉, who were basically the peasant class under the peasantry.^[7] Seeing all this, it is clear that the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were interested a lot about land properties. Inscriptional sources from the early and medieval periods mention that as a result of the practice of giving land to the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉; they emerged as a prominent land-owning class.

Typically, two types of land grants are seen from the copper-plate charters, 补驳谤补丑腻谤补 and brahmadeya. ^[8] Theoretically, 补驳谤补丑腻谤补 could be given to any person even though the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 had the right over it. This privileged class was allowed to enjoy more than one 补驳谤补丑腻谤补. In special cases, it is seen that a particular 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 was given land in two separate areas. Perhaps the 补驳谤补丑腻谤颈办补蝉 (the owner of the 补驳谤补丑腻谤补 lands) of the village in northern India were given the power to sell some of their 补驳谤补丑腻谤补 lands which were excess of necessity. On the other hand, brahmadeya was never as flexible as 补驳谤补丑腻谤补s. Practically, this type of grant was strictly unchangeable and non-transferrable. These lands were exclusively reserved for the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 and according to some scholars, brahmadeya lands were inhabited by the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. In many cases, these land grant charters did not refer the grants as either 补驳谤补丑腻谤补 or brahmadeya as sometimes, only single pieces of land or a 惫腻辫墨 (a step-well) or a plot and in some cases fields were donated by the kings and others.

Many times lands were given to the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 under certain conditions and if that condition was not met, the land could have been confiscated. It is interesting to note, in the description part of 狈腻濒补苍诲补 plates of Samudragupta, it is said that all the customary dues such as gold, etc., should be made over the donee. The donee should not allow the tax-paying cultivators and artisans, etc., of other villages to enter these villages. Otherwise, the 补驳谤补丑腻谤补 will be resumed.^[9] However, the authenticity of the 狈腻濒补苍诲补 plates of Samudragupta is questionable.^[10]

If we take a closer look at the charters that confirming the grants to the vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉, we see that most of them have commonly mentioned the benefits and rights with simplest terms, but have done so specifically. Since the date of donation, the householders/ tenants were instructed to pay 产丑腻驳补 (which was once the king鈥檚 share at that place) and bhoga (which at one time the tenants of that place used to supply various grains, crops, etc. to the king from time to time) to the donee.

The mentioned right of this 产丑腻驳补 and bhoga was applicable only where the whole village was donated to the vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. Where only fields or a piece of land and a single plot were gifted to the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉, the donees could not claim the 产丑腻驳补bhoga though in the cases they were generally exempted from certain taxes. In other words, the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 recipient of land or plot was only free from the burden of 产丑腻驳补 and bhoga while the donee of an entire village, free from the 产丑腻驳补 and bhoga, along with the entitlement to collect these taxes from the peasants and tenants. So, it was a great pleasure for the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 to own a small village rather than owning a large plot as usual as in both cases, the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 did not have to pay anything to the king, but if they owned the village, the tenants were obliged to pay taxes to the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉.

Besides, authority in a village means control over the householders (办耻峁璾尘产颈办补蝉) or the tenants. It is very difficult to understand whether the village recipients, the vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 had the right to increase the amount of these taxes. The term 补辫谤补惫别艣测补尘 has been used in land grants which means that the gifted villages, fields, or landswere not to be entered by the 颁腻峁璦蝉 and the 叠丑补峁璦蝉 (temporary and permanent soldiers). It may have a twofold significance. Either the king relinquished the responsibility of maintaining the law and order of the donated village (which now belonged to the donee) by withdrawing the state supportor the king wanted to withdraw the 颁腻峁璦蝉 and 叠丑补峁璦蝉 from the village because they used to create disturbances there using their power as royal employees.

Several inscriptions issued during the period under study, contain evidence of land transfers and grant renewals. It seems that the donee 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were interested in renewing previous grants for those transferable 补驳谤补丑腻谤补 lands.These copper-plates served as proof of donation as we said earlier and they were carefully stored to avoid any problems in the future. We discussed a while ago that 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 usually do not have to pay any taxes. But in some special cases, we see that the king has imposed taxes on them. So the purpose of the renewal of the earlier grant was maybe revenue-re-evaluation or maybe the previous recipient was unable to produce or pay revenues as fixed by the ruler.

Apart from the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 who were referred to as beneficiaries of the land grants, there were also other 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 whose social status and conditions are not described clearly.

There are a few examples that indicate land grants by brahmins which is known from the research of various scholars. The duty of a 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 includes among others 诲腻苍补. But unfortunately, the inscriptions we are mainly dealing with do not record any instance where 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉d onated land.

The land grant charters indicate that the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 either moved from one place to another or permanently left their ancestral place and moved to a new place. There are some grants where the names of these places are properly identified and there are other places too where the identification has been done based on conjecture and many other places are unknown still now. The land grant charter contains the names of a few villages which have come up more than once in different grants and different contexts. They indicate repeated migrations or the locations testify to the dynamism of the vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. The mobility of the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 took place both inside and outside the region and these will be discussed in detail in a later chapter.

The land-grant charters issued during the period of 4^th to 12^th century CE often mention the identity of the donee 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 in terms of gotra, 肠补谤补峁嘺, pravara, 艣腻办丑腻, genealogy, educational qualifications, and others. In Brahmanic society, at some stage in remote past, gotra, 肠补谤补峁嘺, and pravaras were used to identify an individual. But it had a social import too. Gotra and pravara were taken into consideration at the time of fixing marriage which was not advisable between two families having the same gotra and pravara. But the complete identities of the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 are not found in all the inscriptions, especially in earlier records. In the early period only gotra would be considered for fixing a marriage. But later it was found that different gotras may have the same pravaras. In some cases, it may have been lost. Whatever, on the basis of available sources we may figure the subject.

A chronological list is given below to further examine the matter well.

Land Grant Charters
Copper Plates	Donor King and Dynasty	Brief information about the Donee 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺s	Brief Information of the Grant
P膩ndhurn膩 Plates of pravarasena II, c. 449 CE[11]	pravarasena II, 痴腻办腻峁璦办补	Many 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉, prominent among them Yaj帽膩rya and Bhoj膩rya of 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补 Branch (white Yajurveda) were of 碍补耻峁囜笉颈苍测补 gotra.	2000 nivartanas of land in the village of Dhuvav膩峁璦ka to a number of 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 and twenty-six nivartanas of lands in two villages Lekhapallik膩 and Sa峁単amik膩 situated in the territorial division of 膧rammi-谤腻箩测补 to 厂辞尘腻谤测补. Note: The grant portion (third plate among the five copper plates) recorded here are only for one person 厂辞尘腻谤测补 among many 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 referred to the main grant. That's why scholars think the third plate is actually a forgery, inserted into the charter at a later date to benefit 厂辞尘腻谤测补.
Palit膩n膩 Plates of Dhruvasena, c. 525 CE[12]	Dhruvasena, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 碍耻尘腻谤补艣补谤尘补苍 and Jarabhajyi of 颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测补 branch of 厂腻尘补惫别诲补 andof 艢膩ndilya gotra	140 padavartas in 碍耻峁璾尘产颈-莫艣惫补谤补, 16 padavartas with a well in Madk膩n膩 village in the division of Hastavapra, 140 padavartas, in the village of T膩pasiya and 100 辫腻诲补惫补谤迟补蝉 in the north-east in the village of Tinishaka.
Navalakhi Plate of 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补, c. 605-606 CE[13]	艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 I, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	A group of forty four vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉[14] belonging to different vedic branches.	The village Bho峁囜笉膩naka included in 痴补峁璦苍补驳补谤补-蝉迟丑补濒墨 Free from certain taxes and other privillages.
痴腻濒补 Plates of 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 I, c. 606 CE[15]	艢墨濒腻诲颈迟测补 I, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠丑补峁�峁�颈, who was the son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠丑补峁�峁�补-Guha and belonging to 叠丑补谤补诲惫腻箩补-sagotra, of Kauthuma school (艣腻办丑腻) of the 颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测补 branch of 厂腻尘补惫别诲补.	120 辫腻诲腻惫补谤迟迟补蝉 of land and a v盲p墨 in the village K膩l膩s膩maka. Note: Queen Ja帽jik膩 had lordship rights over the village K膩l膩s膩maka. But it was the king who granted away land in that village. It is likely that the queen had already intimated to him, her desire to grant land in that village as brahmadeya and as it was the king who was the ultimate lord of all land in the village including that which was under the queen's lordship, it was he who issued this charter. However the king made the grant for the increase in the merit of both his parents.
Virdi Plates of Kharagraha I, c. 616-17 CE[16]	Kharagraha I, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Bhava, who was son of Bhadra and belonging to 叠丑腻驳耻谤颈sagotra, 蝉补产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 of Maitr膩yan墨ya school (Yajurveda).	A 惫腻辫墨 (water reservoir) and fifty 辫补诲腻惫补谤迟迟补蝉 of land in Ma峁囜笉al墨dr膩ng. Note: The donee enjoys the land with the rights accruing to it on being granted as a brahmadeya and as such, cultivates the land himself, (under his own management) or has it cultivated or gives it away, none should obstruct him.
Amreli Plates of Kharagraha I, c. 616-17 CE[17]	Kharagraha I, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Gupta , 蝉补产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 of 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补 Branch (white Yajurveda). Son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 膧辫迟补 and belonging to Kundinya-sagotra.	Grant of two 惫腻辫颈蝉 in 膧numa帽ji-蝉迟丑补濒墨. It seems that the grant was not only the two 惫腻辫墨s but was also the land irrigated with the help of the two 惫腻辫颈蝉.
L.D. Institute Copper Plate of Dhruvasena II, c. 630-31 CE[18]	Dhruvasena II-B膩l膩ditya, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 惭腻迟峁沝补迟迟补, who was a student adherent of 颁丑补肠丑丑腻驳补濒别测补 branch and well versed in four Vedas. son of Shashti-datta, and belongs to 础艣惫补濒腻测补峁嘺-蝉补驳辞迟谤补.	100 辫补诲腻惫腻谤迟迟补蝉 of land of the village M膩ndakkasaraka, in 厂补耻谤腻峁ａ弓谤补. The grant was governed by the rule of 产丑奴尘颈肠肠丑颈诲谤补 and exception of brahmadeya, free from certain taxes and other privileges.
Goras Plates of Dhruvasena II, c. 632 CE[19]	Dhruvasena II, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	Two 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 cousins Devakula and Bh膩da , 厂补产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤颈 of 颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测补 branch of 厂腻尘补惫别诲补. Son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 艢补谤尘补, belonging to 碍补辫颈峁ａ弓丑补濒补-sagotra and son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Dattila respectively.	100 辫补诲腻惫补谤迟迟补蝉 in the village 叠补丑耻尘奴濒补, included in the Va峁璦pallik膩蝉迟丑补濒墨 in 厂补耻谤腻峁ａ弓谤补.
Nogawa Plates of Dhruvasena II鈥揂, c. 639 -640 CE[20]	Dhruvasena II, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 础驳苍颈蝉惫腻尘颈苍 , son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Kum膩ra蝉惫腻尘颈, a 产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 of 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补-(艣腻办丑腻鈥搘丑颈迟别 Yajurveda) belonging to 笔补谤腻艣补谤补-gotra and who is of 鲍肠肠补尘腻苍补鈥�肠腻迟耻谤惫颈诲测腻蝉腻尘腻苍测补 and 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Sa峁単aravi , son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 惭补丑别艣惫补谤补, a 产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 of 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补鈥�(艣腻办丑腻) belonging to 碍补耻艣颈办补蝉补驳辞迟谤补 and who is of 鲍肠肠补尘腻苍补-肠腻迟耻谤惫颈诲测腻蝉腻尘腻苍测补. Both of the donees learned 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补艣腻办丑腻 (white Yajurveda).	100 产丑补办迟墨蝉 of land in the eastern boundary of the village Nava驳谤腻尘补ka in 鲍肠肠补尘腻苍补鈥�bhukti in M膩lavaka which area of land is bounded on the east by the 碍补峁卥补峁璦 of the village Var膩ho峁璦ka, the river on the south, the Lakshma峁嘺-辫补峁�峁�颈办腻 on the west and the 碍补峁卥补峁璦 of the village Pulin诲腻苍补ka on the north.
Nogawa Plates of Dhruvasena II鈥揃, c. 640 -641 CE[21]	Dhruvasena II, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	Traividy膩蝉腻尘腻苍测补产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Datta-蝉惫腻尘颈, son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Budha蝉惫腻尘颈, a 产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 (the adherent-follower) of 惭腻诲丑测补苍诲颈苍补-痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补 (school of Yajurveda) belonging to 笔补谤腻艣补谤补-sagotra and Kuk膩ra蝉惫腻尘颈 son of Budha蝉惫腻尘颈, a 产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 of 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补 (school) belonging to 笔补谤腻艣补谤补sagotra, and to 鲍肠肠补尘腻苍补-肠腻迟耻谤惫颈诲测腻蝉腻尘腻苍测补 associated to the Yajurveda,痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补 Branch (white Yajurveda).	100 bhaktis in the southern quarter of the village Candraputraka in 鲍肠肠补尘腻苍补鈥�惫颈峁�a测补 in M膩lavaka.
Bh膩vnagar Plates of Dh膩r膩sena (IV)鈥揂, c. 645鈥�646 CE[22]	Dh膩r膩sena IV, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	Two 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 brothers Arjuna and Manka蝉惫腻尘颈n, the son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Guh膩岣峢ya who is a sa-产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 (adherent -follower) of 颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测补 is a Sa-产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 (adherent -follower) of 颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测补 (蝉肠丑辞辞濒鈥�厂腻尘补惫别诲补 branch), belonging to 叠丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补鈥�sagotra, who is a product of the institution imparting education in all the four Vedas at Si峁僪apur膩-蝉补产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 of 颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测补 Branch of 厂腻尘补惫别诲补.	A plot of a land consisted of 56 辫补诲腻惫补谤迟迟补蝉 and the well (reservoir-laka) occupying an area of 16 辫补诲腻惫补谤迟迟补蝉 on the western boundary of the village Kikka峁璦putra, a plot of field (办峁�e迟谤补-办丑补峁囜笉补m) measuring 28 辫补诲腻惫补谤迟迟补蝉 on the western boundary of the village Sarkkar膩padraka a plot in a field (办峁�e迟谤补-办丑补峁囜笉补m) measuring 14 辫补诲腻惫补谤迟迟补蝉 as bounded on the east by the same field of Bavyasthaviraka, six pattakas. The above-stated fields including the stepwell (惫腻辫墨-办峁�e迟谤补m) amounting to 120 辫补诲腻惫补谤迟迟补蝉 in total.
Alin膩 Plates of Dh膩r膩sena IV, c. 649鈥�650 CE[23]	Dh膩r膩sena IV, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 N膩r膩yanamitra , was the son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 碍别艣补惫补-mitra, belonging to 艢补谤办办补谤腻办蝉丑颈-蝉补驳辞迟谤补, a 蝉补产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 of 叠补丑惫峁沜补 Branch of 峁欢惫别诲补.	The village Desurakshitijja in si峁僪apallik膩-pathaka in 碍丑别峁璦办补鈥�腻丑腻谤补.
Kheda (Kaira) Plates of Dhruvasena IV, c. 649鈥�650 CE[24]	Dharasena IV, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 础诲颈迟颈艣补谤尘补苍, 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补 Branch (white Yajurveda).	Granted property consisted of two fields, one in Kolamba in the Vi峁�aya of 碍丑别峁璦办补 and the other in the village of Duhuduhu of Nagaraka-paihaka.
K膩pa岣峷a峁嘺j Plates of Dhr奴vasena III, c. 653 -654 CE[25]	Dhruvasena III, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠丑补峁�峁�颈bha峁璦 , son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Bappa, a 蝉补产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 of 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补 (white Yajurveda) belonging to 碍补耻艣颈办补-sagotra, who was a 肠腻迟耻谤惫惫颈诲测补-蝉腻尘腻苍测补.	He received the village of Pattapadraka in the dak峁�i峁嘺patta of 艢iva产丑腻驳补pura-v谋峁�aya.
Alina Plates of Kharagraha II, c. 656鈥�657 CE)[26]	Kharagraha II, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 狈腻谤腻测补峁嘺, A 蝉补产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 of 叠补丑惫峁沜补 branch belonging to 艢腻谤办办补谤腻办蝉丑颈-蝉补驳辞迟谤补, a 蝉腻尘腻苍测补 of all four Vedas.	Kharagraha II granted the village Pa峁単ulapallik膩 in Gh峁泃膩laya-产丑奴尘颈 in 艢iva产丑腻驳补pura-Vi峁�aya with the usual rights and privileges.
Grant of 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 III, c. 666 CE[27]	艢iladitya III, Maitraka of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 驰补箩帽补诲补迟迟补, son of 艢ridharadatta.	He was given two fields, a hundred 辫补诲腻惫补谤迟补蝉 each; one of them was in Padmava峁璱ka驳谤腻尘补 in Kal膩k峁�yetaka.
Grant of 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 III, c. 666 CE[28]	艢iladitya III, Maitraka of 痴补濒补产丑墨	Three 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. Two of them were the son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠丑补峁�峁�颈hari, Pittale艣vara 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 and Pittale艣vara's son 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 狈腻驳补 And another donee was 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Soma.	They were given two fields, each of them measuring fifty 辫补诲腻惫补谤迟补蝉 situated in 痴腻峁璦numaka驳谤腻尘补 and D膩cc膩nak膩驳谤腻尘补.
Jesar Plates of Siladitya-III, Set. I, c. 666鈥�667 CE[29]	艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 III, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤补丑尘补峁嘺 Dik峁�ita , A 肠丑腻迟耻谤惫颈诲测补-蝉腻尘腻苍测补 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补-Branch (white Yajurveda) (as mentioned in next set of Jesar plates).	He was given a hundred p膩d膩va峁�峁璦s of land in a village named Kukkapadra in the K膩l膩pakapathaka of Saur膩峁�tra.
Lunsadi Plates of S墨l膩ditya II鈥揂, c. 669-670 CE[30]	艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 II, Maitraka of 痴补濒补产丑墨	Two 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 brothers.	This grant consisted of some lands and a pond in the village Desenaka.
Lunsadi Plates of S墨l膩ditya II鈥� B, c. 671鈥�672 CE[31]	艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 II, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Magopadatta, son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Kikkaka, an Adhvaryyu, 测补箩耻谤惫别诲墨测补 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 belonging to 骋腻谤驳驳测补-蝉补驳辞迟谤补, familiar to three Vedas.	A grant of a field in Dh奴峁Ｄ� village was given to him.
Jesar Plates of 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补-III Set. II, c. 676鈥�677 CE[32]	艢墨濒腻诲颈迟测补 III, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤补丑尘补峁嘺 Dik峁�ita, A c膩turvidy膩-蝉腻尘腻苍测补 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补-Branch (white Yajurveda). Son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 S膩mbadatta. This 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补蝉补产谤补丑尘补肠丑腻谤墨, belonging to 碍补耻艣颈办补-sagotra.	In this grant he received 104 padavarttas of land again from 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 III on the northern boundary of the village of Madasara.
Anastu Plates of 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补鈥� III, c. 677 CE[33]	艢墨濒腻诲颈迟测补 III, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠腻濒补-艣补谤尘补苍, An Adhvaryu 蝉补产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 or was 测补箩耻谤惫别诲墨测补 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 belonged to Upasmanyusagotra.	He was given two plots of paddy-fields, sowable with a 辫颈峁璦办补 of paddy in the village 础苍迟颈办腻 in Bharukachchha-惫颈峁�a测补.
Bh膩vnagar Plates of 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 III, c. 691 CE[34]	艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 III, Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠丑奴迟补-办耻尘腻谤补, son of 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 顿谤辞峁嘺, a 蝉补产谤补丑尘补肠丑腻谤墨 (adherentfollower) of 惭补颈迟谤腻测补峁嚹珁补 school of Yajurveda belonging to 叠丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补-sagotra.	He received the village Lo峁嚹乸adraka along with Uparipa峁璦ka of Kho岣峚sthalaka in Lo峁嚹乸adraka-蝉迟丑腻濒墨 in 厂补耻谤腻峁ａ弓谤补.
A Grant of 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补, c. 722-723 CE[35]	艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 Maitraka of 痴补濒补产丑墨	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠丑补峁�峁�补 痴腻蝉耻诲别惫补产丑奴迟颈. son of Damodara产丑奴迟颈.	He was given the 膧ntarapallik膩 village near Dinnaputra in Saura峁�tra.
Dungarpur Plates of Bhavihitra, c. 655 CE[36]	Bh膩vihita, Guhilas of Ki峁�kindh膩pur膩	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 膧sanga艣补谤尘补苍, A 蝉补产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨 of 惭腻诲丑测补苍诲颈苍补 branch of 艣耻办濒补测补箩耻谤惫别诲补.	He was given a village in the Purapa峁�峁璦-惫颈峁�a测补.
Abhona Plates of Sa峁僰ara驳补峁嘺 , c. 596-597 CE[37]	艢amkara驳补峁嘺 , Ka峁璦ccuri/ Early Kal膩curi	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 厂惫腻尘颈苍.	100 padavarttas in th茅 village of Vallisika, in Bhogavardhana-惫颈峁�a测补.
Sarsavani Plates of Buddhar膩ja, c. 610 CE[38]	Buddhar膩ja, Ka峁璦ccuri	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Bappa鈥摬醣鼓宄揪眓, son of the Bha峁�峁璾, a Brahmin adherent of the school, 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补-碍补峁噕补 branch of 艢耻办濒补-yajurveda and belonging to 笔补谤腻艣补谤补鈥搒补驳辞迟谤补.	The villagegranted was Kum膩riva岣廰券 adjacent to B峁沨ann膩rik膩 in Gorajj膩bhoga included in Bharukachchha鈥摫咕贬梗a测补.
Bonda Plates of 惭补丑腻艣颈惫补 T墨vara, c. 600 CE[39]	惭补丑腻艣颈惫补T墨v ara, P膩n岣島vam艣is	Twenty-five 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 belonged to Yajurveda, and 厂腻尘补惫别诲补. One of them 叠丑补峁�峁�补, six 耻辫腻诲诲丑瘸补测补 and rest of their name ends with 蝉惫腻尘颈. [40]	Bondaka and Ava岣峣ka in Pihar膩ja-bhukti that the village has been granted through a libation of water to increase religious merit of his parents and self.
Kaira Plates of Dadda (Pra艣膩ntar膩ga) -A c. 629 -630 CE100	Dadda II, Pra艣膩ntar膩ga, Early 骋奴谤箩补谤补	Forty 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. Thirty-five of themwere adherents of 峁沢惫别诲墨测补, 测补箩耻谤惫别诲墨测补 and 肠丑腻苍诲辞驳测补 (厂腻尘补惫别诲墨测补) 艣腻办丑腻s and other 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were Athavavedins. [41]	The grant of a village named 艢ir墨shapadraka situated in the Akrure艣vara惫颈峁�a测补.
Kaira Plates of Dadda II (Pra艣膩ntar膩ga) 鈥揃, c. 633-634 CE102	Dadda II, Pra艣膩ntar膩ga, Early 骋奴谤箩补谤补	From the earlier charter the five 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺s of 础迟丑补谤惫补峁嘺-veda (碍补耻峁囜笉颈苍测补-sagotra and of 叠丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补-sagotra) were omitted mention here and five more new names are seen added here.	Identical with the first set of the charter.
Sankhed Plates of Dadda II鈥揂 and B, c. 642 CE[42]	Dadda II, Early 骋奴谤箩补谤补	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 S奴ryya A student of 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补 惭腻诲丑测补苍诲颈苍补 branch of Yajurveda belonging to 叠丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补-sagotra.	He received a grant of the eastern quarter of Suva峁涐箛峁嚹乺apalli village.
Umeta Plates Of Dadda II, c. 648-49 CE104	Dadda (III) Early 骋奴谤箩补谤补	叠丑补峁�峁�补-惭腻诲丑补惫补, son of 叠丑补峁�峁�补-惭补丑墨诲丑补谤补 a scholar adherent of the 叠补丑惫峁沜补 branch of 峁欢惫别诲补 belonging to 肠腻迟耻谤惫颈诲测腻蝉腻尘腻苍测补 of 痴补艣颈峁ａ弓丑补蝉补驳辞迟谤补.	He was given the village Nigu岣峚, bounded on the east by the village Baghauri, on the south by the village Phalahavadra, on the west by the village Vi峁噃膩峁嘺 and on the north by the village Dahithali, in the bhukti (territorial division) Kama峁嚹珁a.
Bagumra Plates of Dadda c. 663 CE[43]	Dadda (III), Early 骋奴谤箩补谤补	叠丑补峁�峁�补-Govinda, son of 叠丑补峁�峁�补 惭补丑墨诲丑补谤补, 颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测补-艣腻办丑腻 of 厂腻尘补惫别诲补 belonging to 碍补耻艣颈办补-sagotra	The donee received a grant of the village Tatha-鲍尘产补谤腻 as bounded on the east by the village Ushilatha峁嘺, on the south by the village Ishi, on the west by the village Sa峁僰iya, on the north by the village Jaravadra, included in the Tatha-Umbar-腻丑腻谤腻诲-痴补濒颈艣补
Ilao Plates of Dadda (II) Pra艣膩ntar膩ga, c. 665 CE[44]	Dadda (II) Pra艣膩ntar膩ga, Early 骋奴谤箩补谤补	叠丑补峁�峁�补-狈腻谤腻测补峁嘺, son of 叠丑补峁�峁�补-Govinda, a scholar鈥揳dherent of 叠补丑惫峁沜补 school of 峁欢惫别诲补 who belonged to 碍腻艣测补辫补-gotra.	It records the grant of the village R膩idha峁� falling within Ankule艣vara-惫颈峁�a测补 as bounded by the village V膩ra峁噀ra in the east, Vara峁囜笉a river on the south, the village Su峁冡弓hava岣峚ka on the west, the village Aralua峁� and the north, included in Akule艣vara惫颈峁�a测补.
Prince of Wales Museum Plates of Gurjara Dadda III, c. 676-677 CE107	Dadda III, Early 骋奴谤箩补谤补	The donee was an unnamed 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 here.	The donee received a grant of a village Uvarivadra in Korill膩.
Parlakimedi Plates of Anantavarma n, c. 700 CE[45]	Anantavarma n, Early 骋奴谤箩补谤补	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Vi峁ａ箛usom膩c膩rya .	He was given the village Talatthere in Kro峁�tukavarttani.
Navasari plates of Jayabha峁璦 III, c. 705-706 CE109	Jayabha峁璦 III, Early 骋奴谤箩补谤补	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Deva蝉惫腻尘颈n , son of 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Datta.	He was granted the Samipadraka village in Korill膩pathaka.
The Prince of Wales Museum Plates, c. 735-736 CE110	Jayabha峁璦 IV, Early 骋奴谤箩补谤补	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠丑补峁�峁�补-achchada, son of Adityan膩ga.	He received the village of Mann膩tha, located in the Bharukachchha惫颈峁�a测补.
Lohaner Plates of 笔耻濒补办别艣颈苍 II, c. 630 CE[46]	笔耻濒补办别艣颈苍 II, Early 颁腻濒耻办测补	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 顿腻尘补诲颈办峁�i迟补.	A village named Goviya峁嘺ka which was near the village of Asikhetaka and was included in Mo峁�i峁噄pathaka was granted to him.
Mudgapadra Grant of 驰耻惫补谤腻箩补 艢rey膩艣raya 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补, c. 668-669 CE112	Vikram膩dity a (I); 艢rey膩艣raya 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 颁腻濒耻办测补s of 叠腻诲腻尘颈	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Rev膩ditya and Varasyaka of 膧艣惫补濒腻测补苍补-sagotra (峁欢惫别诲补).	Thet were given the village Mudgapadra included in Vichih膩ra.
Navasari Plates of 艢rey膩艣raya 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补, c. 671 CE[47]	艢rey膩艣raya 艢颈濒腻诲颈迟测补 -驰耻惫补谤腻箩补, 颁腻濒耻办测补s of Gujarat	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 M膩t峁焛艣vara, son of 厂腻尘补苍迟补-蝉惫腻尘颈n, who was himself the son of 膧goma蝉惫腻尘颈n who hails from Navas膩rik膩 and to his younger brothers Kikka-蝉惫腻尘颈n and Bhogikka蝉惫腻尘颈n, all of whom were Addhvaryu产谤补丑尘补肠腻谤墨s.	They were granted the village 膧sa峁�峁璱 in Ka峁噃aval腻丑腻谤补-惫颈峁�a测补 included in 叠腻丑颈谤颈办腻-惫颈峁�a测补.
Navasari Plates of Avanijan膩艣ra ya Pulake艣ir膩ja, c. 739-740 CE114	Avanijan膩艣ra ya Pulake艣ir膩ja, Early 颁腻濒耻办测补	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 碍腻帽肠补濒补, son of Govindali.	Pulake艣ir膩ja granted him the village Padraka, situated in the 础丑腻谤补 and Karma峁噀ya惫颈峁�a测补.
Mumdaka grant ofBh墨madeva I, c. 1030 CE[48]	Bhimadeva I, 颁腻濒耻办测补s of Gujarat	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 痴腻蝉耻诲别惫补, son of Balabhadra, an 耻诲墨肠测补 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺.	Bhimadeva I was donated him merely a 丑腻濒补 of land in Murndaka驳谤腻尘补 situated in Varddhi惫颈峁�a测补.
Bagunra Plates of Allasakti, c. 656 CE[49]	础濒濒补艣补办迟颈, Sendraka	Bappa-蝉惫腻尘颈n, A student of 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补m膩ddhyandina branch of Yajurveda belonging to 叠丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补-sagotra.	He was given the village Balisa included in the Vi峁�aya in the Treya峁囜箛膩h谩ra.
Hansot Plates of the 颁腻丑补尘腻苍补 Vigrahar膩ja, c. 973 C.E.[50]	Bhart峁泇a岣嶀笉ha II, 颁腻丑补尘腻苍补	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠丑补峁�峁�补-叠奴峁璦, the son of T膩vi, Adhvaryu of the 惭腻诲丑测补苍诲颈苍补 branch and of the 碍腻耻苍岣峣苍测补-驳辞迟谤补, a student of the 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补 (蝉补峁僪颈迟腻).	The 4th part of the Arjunadevi village situated within Akruresvara district.
Ellora Plates of R膩峁�trak奴峁璦 Dantidurga, c. 741 CE[51]	Dantidurga, 搁腻峁ａ弓谤补办奴峁璦	Three 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. They were 膧诲颈迟测补bhatta, Maula, and Govisara. -	They were granted the village of Pippal膩la in the district of Candrapuri.
Hilol Plates of Year 470, c. 788 CE[52]	Kakka, 搁腻峁ａ弓谤补办奴峁璦	叠丑补峁�峁�补 惭腻迟峁沢补峁嘺, son of 惭腻迟谤墨艣vara, who belonged to the 碍腻艣测补辫补 gotra and a well versed in the Vedas and its six 补峁噂补蝉 of 惭腻诲丑测补苍诲颈苍补-艣腻办丑腻 of 艢耻办濒补-Yajurveda and he kept the sacred fire since his childhood.	The grant consisted of two pieces of land, each a quarter (catur-产丑腻驳补), one of them situated in P膩d膩峁璦ka-驳谤腻尘补 and the other in Hilohila 驳谤腻尘补. The gift land thus consisted of one fourth share of each of the two villages.
The Prince of Wales Museum Plates, c. 810 CE[53]	骋辞惫颈苍诲补谤腻箩补, 搁腻峁ａ弓谤补办奴峁璦	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Bhobika , son of 叠丑补峁�峁�补jaya.	He was granted the village Usau峁嘺ka in the V膩h膩ulacatur膩艣墨ti.
Baroda grant of Karkka 厂耻惫补谤峁嘺惫补谤峁�a, c. 812 CE[54]	Karkka 厂耻惫补谤峁嘺惫补谤峁�a, 搁腻峁ａ弓谤补办奴峁璦	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠丑腻苍耻产丑补峁�峁�补, the son of 叠丑补峁�峁�补 Som膩ditya, who belonged to the society of the 颁补迟耻谤惫别诲墨蝉 who was of the 痴腻迟蝉测腻测补苍补-gotra and who was a student of the 惭腻诲丑测补苍诲颈苍补艣腻办丑腻 (of the 艢耻办濒补 Yajurveda).	The king granted him the village Va岣峚padraka included 84 villages in the A峁卥o峁�峁璦ka.
Jambgaon grant, c. 914-915 CE122	Indra III, 搁腻峁ａ弓谤补办奴峁璦	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Siddhapa产丑补峁�峁�补. son of Vennapa产丑补峁�峁�补.	He was given the villages of Kurundaka, Tenna and others in the vicinity of Kammanija situated in 尝腻峁璦诲别艣补.
Chinchani grant of Indra III, c. 926-927 CE123	Indra III, 搁腻峁ａ弓谤补办奴峁璦	笔补帽肠补-Gaudiya-northern 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 Samy膩na.	They were granted a village Kanaduka and some land in Devihara village.
Cambay Plates of Govinda IV; Sakasamvat 852, c. 930 CE[55]	Govinda IV, 搁腻峁ａ弓谤补办奴峁璦	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 狈腻驳补mayya, son of 惭补丑腻诲别惫补yya, belonging to the 惭腻峁环补谤补-gotra and a student of the student of 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补-碍腻峁噕补-艣腻办丑腻.	Govinda IV granted him the village of Keva帽ja, lying near the holy place K膩vik膩 and situated in the 碍丑别峁璦办补 district of the 尝腻迟补 country.
S膩ngli grant of Govinda IV, c. 933 CE[56]	Govinda IV, 搁腻峁ａ弓谤补办奴峁璦	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 碍别艣补惫补 Dik峁�ita, son of 顿腻尘辞诲补谤补产丑补峁�峁�补.	The king gifted the donee Loh膩驳谤腻尘补 included in the Ramapuri-700.
Deoli Plates of 碍峁涐梗峁嘺 III, c. 940 CE[57]	碍峁涐梗峁嘺 III, 搁腻峁ａ弓谤补办奴峁璦	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Rishiappa or Rishiyapayya.	A village called T膩lapuru峁冡梗aka was given to him.
Dharmapuri grant of 笔补谤补尘腻谤补V膩k pati II, c. 974 CE[58]	痴腻办辫补迟颈 II (痴腻办辫补迟颈Mu帽 ja), 笔补谤补尘腻谤补.	叠谤补丑尘补峁嘺 Vasant膩c膩rya, son of Pandita Dhanika.	He was given a 迟补诲腻谤补 (plot of a field) on the bank of the river 狈补谤尘补诲腻 named Pipparika.
Three Copper-Plate Inscription from GaonriB, c. 981 CE[59]	痴腻办辫补迟颈r膩ja, 笔补谤补尘腻谤补	26 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉, where the firstmentioned donee was a 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 named 厂补谤惫腻苍补苍诲补. All belonging to the different branches of the Vedas. However, the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 belonging to the 峁欢惫别诲补 seemed to have received special preference.	This grant consisted of 78 parts of a village Va峁噄k膩 in the 膧varakabhoga and H奴峁嘺ma峁囜笉ala.
Second set of Gaonri Plates of 痴腻办辫补迟颈 II, c. 986 CE[60]	痴腻办辫补迟颈 II, 笔补谤补尘腻谤补	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 厂补谤惫腻苍补苍诲补, the son of 顿墨办峁�i迟补 Lok膩nanda of the 厂补峁僰峁泃颈-gotra and 膧sval膩yana-艣腻办丑腻 with three pravaras.	He was given the village of Kadahichchhaka in Maddhukabhukti.
The Betma grant of 笔补谤补尘腻谤补Bho jadeva, c. 1019 CE[61]	Bhojadeva, 笔补谤补尘腻谤补	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Pan岣峣ta Delha, son of Thattha艣ika.	A village called Nalatad膩ga was granted in favor of Pan岣峣ta Delha.
Depalpur grant of Bhojar膩ja, c. 1022 CE[62]	笔补谤补尘腻谤补 Bhoja, 笔补谤补尘腻谤补	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Vacchala, son of 叠丑补峁�峁�补-So艣vara	Bhojar膩ja handed over a property at Kirikaik膩 in the western p膩thaka of 鲍箩箩补测颈苍墨 to the donee.
N膩nyaur膩 Copper-Plate Inscription of Dha峁単adeva c. 998 CE[63]	顿丑补峁単补诲别惫补, Candella	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 驰补艣辞诲丑补谤补-产丑补峁�峁�补, son of the 叠丑补峁�峁�补 Jaya办耻尘腻谤补 of the 叠丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补-gotra, with three pravaras viz., 叠丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补, 膧峁単颈谤补蝉补 and 叠腻谤丑补蝉辫补迟测补, of the 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补-艣腻办丑腻.	He was granted the village 颁耻濒濒墨 (or Yull墨) bounded by a barron spot (奴蝉丑补谤补惫腻丑补辫谤补迟颈产补诲诲丑补).
Santiragama grant of Dan岣峣mah膩d evi c. 10th Century[64]	Dan岣峣mah膩d evi, BhaumaKaras	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 叠丑补峁�峁�补-M膩kyadeva, son of J膩lladeva.	A village Santira-驳谤腻尘补 and another locality called Komyosanga, situated within Tamura-惫颈峁�a测补 in Dak峁�ina 罢辞峁�a濒补 was handed over to the donee.
Grant of Vakulamah膩 诲别惫墨, c. 10th Century[65]	Vakulamah膩诲别惫墨, BhaumaKara	叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 Mihadhich膩ya, the son of 叠丑补峁�峁�补putra 狈墨濒补办补峁囜弓丑补 belonged to the Vatsa-gotra and to the pravaras of 叠丑腻谤驳补惫补, Cyavana, 膧pnava, Aurva and 闯腻尘补诲补驳苍测补 and was a student of the 膧艣惫补濒腻测补苍补 艣腻办丑腻.	The Bhauma-Kara queen granted the village named Cho岣嵞乼avuts膩 attached to the Urego岣嶀笉膩-办丑补峁囜笉补, situated in the 艢rava峁嘺katik膩-惫颈峁�a测补 in the Uttara-Tosal膩 country.

The term gotra is considered equivalent to lineage. In a broader sense it indicates a common male ancestorfrom whom an unbroken line of male progeny continues. 颁补谤补峁嘺 is the preceptor-pupil lineage, a succession, a school (艣腻办丑腻/ branch), devoted to the learning and teaching of a branch of the Vedas. Both the terms gotra and 肠补谤补峁嘺 are connected with the growth of vedic ritual. A member of a gotra may start a 肠补谤补峁嘺 which maybe known by his gotra name. It does not make them (gotra and 肠补谤补峁嘺) identical in purpose or intent.

Besides a gotra and its pravara, all vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were supposed to belong to a 肠补谤补峁嘺. ^[66] All of them were indeed the items of a 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺鈥檚 specification of his identity . The first mention of the term 肠补谤补峁嘺 occurs in an Odishan inscription in c. 635 CE.^[67] The pravara identity is descended from a specific 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 from the vedic sage who belonged to their gotra. Three of themhave been used to identify someone's predecessor. However, as we see, with the exception of a few examples, 肠补谤补峁嘺 and pravara are rarely mentioned in early inscriptions and gotra has been widely used to identify the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 specifically.

According to Ghurye, they did not originate in 峁沢vedic times. They took shape as a socio-religious product after the gotras came in.^[68] The 艢atapatha产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 (c. 800 BCE) was the first to use the term pravara. The next stage was in 叠补耻诲丑腻测补苍补-艣谤补耻迟补蝉奴迟谤补 (c. 600 BCE), which listed 800 gotras, (however doubtful)^[69] and 91 峁涐梗颈蝉 (sages) supposed to be connected with them. They were called pravaras-峁涐梗颈蝉. ^[70] According to P.V. Kane, though the term gotra was not used in 峁沢vedic times, gotra as an idea existed at that era so did pravaras a little latter.^[71]

The use of pravaras in gotra came in ritual practice in 艣谤补耻迟补 ceremonies in the 5^th century BCE.^[72] At the non-ritual level, pravaras as a source of identity along with gotra were used first by Odishan monarchs during the 6^th-7^th century CE.^[73] 驰腻箩帽补惫补濒办测补 (3^rd century CE) insisted on both gotra and 肠补谤补峁嘺. In fact from 驰腻箩帽补惫补濒办测补 till the modern period, most of the law-givers insisted that pravara be given due weight while considering one's gotra. ^[74]

In many cases, we find the term sa-gotra which means 鈥榦f the same gotra-group鈥�. However, in the inscriptions, it is mostly associated with educational lineage for example 膧艣惫补濒腻测补峁嘺 (峁欢惫别诲补), 碍腻辫颈峁ａ弓丑补濒补 (Yajurveda) and others.

A woman, on marriage, loses her father鈥檚 gotra name and acquires her husband鈥檚 gotra which is continued through her male children and unmarried daughters. Surprisingly, the gotrai dentity is quite popular in India still in this 21st century. It has survived more or less 2500 years, and still continues surviving. According to Ghurye, this is among the supreme examples of how certain ideas survive without seriously questioned. Whatever, as far as the gotra-identity is concerned, some common gotras are seen to have been mentioned along with some uncommon ones.Sometimes, however, it is found that transfer of gotra of a married female does not take place. Famous examples are Kuberan膩g膩, queen of Candragupta II and Prabh膩vat墨gupt膩, daughter of Candragupta II.

Of approximately a hundred and twenty-five gotras (familiar and loner), only twelve gotras cover more or less 65% of the total sample of the donees in northern India. 叠丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补, 碍腻艣测补辫补, 碍补耻艣颈办补, 笔补谤腻蝉补谤补, 碍补耻峁囜笉颈苍测补, 骋腻谤驳测补, 痴补艣颈峁ａ弓丑补 Vatsa, 膧迟谤别测补, Gautama, 碍腻峁噕补, Maudgalya, were the most common gotras found in the inscriptions in northern India. Among these twelve gotras as mentioned above, 叠丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补, 碍补耻艣颈办补, 碍补耻峁囜笉颈苍测补, 笔补谤腻蝉补谤补 and 碍腻艣测补辫补 gotra claim the maximum number of recipients while 叠丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were bestowed in a highest number of grants. This indicates the dominance of the vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 of these gotras in northern India or indicates that they were higher in number at the period under study.

Apart from these common gotras, there are others that deserve some discussion.Some other strange unfamiliar gotras can be seen here too. For example, two Harsol膩 Copper-plate Grants of Siyaka (c. 949 CE)^[75] issued by the King S墨yaka (II) of 笔补谤补尘腻谤补 Dynasty records a grant of the village of Kumbh膩ro峁璦ka and S墨hak膩 in the Moha岣峚v膩saka-惫颈峁�a测补 respectively to Lallop膩dhy膩ya, son of Govardhana and N墨n膩 D墨kshita, son of Lallop膩dhy膩ya, 狈腻驳补ra产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 of 膧苍补苍诲补辫耻谤补, belonging to the Go pali-gotra. Similarly, sometimes 惭腻峁环补谤补, 厂补峁僰峁泃颈, 艢膩rkkar膩kshi, 叠丑腻驳耻谤颈, Upasmanyu and other unfamiliar gotras can be seen as well.

As we see, the donee 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 and their fathers as described in the land grant charters, had the name-endings with 艣补谤尘腻/ 艣arma峁�, 产丑补峁�峁�补, 蝉惫腻尘墨/ 蝉惫腻尘颈n and some of them used other name-endings. There are instances where the father's surname and the son's surname did not match. Again, the name-endings of the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were not fixed always, and thus, the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were not always identifiable only by their names or their fathers. It seems that the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 name-endings were subjected to change from generation to generation. However, most of the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 families not preferred to any changes in name-endings. This is more than those who accepted little change. Gradually, the educational qualifications began to be included in the name.

The 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 of northern India studied and taught theVedas. But not all of them studied all the four Vedas. Noticeably, the tendency to learn more Vedas proficiently was handed down from generation to generation. If we notice carefully, we will see that those 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were in high demand for donations who had mastered at least one Veda along with the other three. There is not a single instance in which only Atharvaveda has been mastered by the donee 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. Atharvaveda is mentioned only in the context of the examples where these 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 have read four Vedas 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 who acquired knowledge in Caturveda (all four Vedas).

As the importance of yajurvedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 increased, the practice of donating land to 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 specialized in 峁欢惫别诲补 and 厂腻尘补惫别诲补 decreased gradually after the 7^th century CE. The 艢耻办濒补-Yajurveda refers the mantras to be uttered by the main priest during vedic sacrifices while the 碍峁涐梗峁嘺-Yajurveda narrates and explains the sacrifices along with certain sutras.And both of the branches of Yajurveda found much preference among the donee 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 of northern India. The donee 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were not averse to the study of philosophical texts. Again, we do not find any of them who were mentioned as well-versed in philosophy. However, the mention of 滨迟颈丑腻蝉补-笔耻谤腻峁嘺 in inscriptions is found in a few cases. Some of 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 was famous for their knowledge in 厂尘峁泃颈艣腻蝉迟谤补蝉. Sanskrit inscriptions reveal that Yajurveda had more followers than anything and the vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 constituted the largest number in the society. All of them were proficient scholars and certainly well versed and mastered the Vedas . Besides, the inscriptions found in northern India, reveals the abode of the learned 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉.

Most of the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 accepting land grants were proficient in vedic literature; however, at the same time, some of them have mastered in the 滨迟颈丑腻蝉补-笔耻谤腻峁嘺 traditions. And, some of them practiced 膧驳补尘补蝉 and Tantras also. Despite that, almost all of the vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 engaged themselves in various vedic sacrifices. Perhaps vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 did not generally worship pur膩峁噄c gods and goddesses. Few of them, worshipped pur膩峁噄c deities while following the six duties of the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. We have already seen many examples where the names of 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 started with the names of pur膩峁噄c deities. Besides, there are also some examples that start with the names of vedic deities. Their names, surnames, titles, the functions they performed, the terms have been used to describe them and their designations, 惫补谤峁嘺, gotra, status wherever available in the context of land-transactions reflect the identity of their social status and religious inclination.

Besides, the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were engaged into higher administrative authority. Most of the composers of the charters of northern India were learned 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 and mostly had 产丑补峁�峁�补 attached to their names. Inscriptions contained both prose and verse. Based on that, there were two types of composers-lekhaka (writer of the prose-portion of the charters) and kavi (who used to write the poetical part of the charters in a poetic way). The charters bear information about the names, titles, qualifications, and others related to the composer of the charter. However, these composers were not all 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. The existence of professional artisan groups can be seen by the names of the engravers of these charters. They have enjoyed different status in different regions as evidenced by the charters.

It is evident from the study of epigraphic materials during the 4th -12th century CE that the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 in the northern region of India were the most privileged class of contemporary society and they preferred to be proficient in vedic education.

It is sometimes observed that the lands were granted with certain terms and conditions. In northern India, we have seen various sections of 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉, who are depicted as recipients of grants and sometimes figured as the authors of those inscriptions. We may categorize them as, vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 who were well versed and so proficient in the Vedas, 艢腻蝉迟谤补蝉, 厂尘峁泃颈蝉, and other Indian traditional sciences; some 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 belonging to the autochthonous groups; the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 who have occupied important military and administrative responsibilities under the state; 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 who belonged to the priestly class and worshiped in temples and shrines and the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 who composed 辫谤补艣补蝉迟颈 for their patrons. However, the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were important because they would construct legendry genealogies drawing from the Ithih膩sa-笔耻谤腻峁嘺 traditions. These were incorporated in 辫谤补艣补蝉迟颈 sections to prove the superiority of the king over his subjects and other contemporary kings.^[76]

Those 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were the intellectual group of the time and the custodians of vedic knowledge. The dignity of these 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 comes from their studies and practice of vedic tradition. The donees were described as well versed in Veda, Ved膩峁噂as, 滨迟颈丑腻蝉补, 笔耻谤腻峁嘺, 测补箩帽补, and all S膩艣tras in land grant charters in northern India. Those records say that the gifts were made for the prosperity of dharma and longevity, that is, for the welfare of the king. At the request of their queens, the kingsometimes would grant land to the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉. In some cases, kings granted lands to their Kula-产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 (family priests). Adhering to the tradition of 顿丑补谤尘补艣腻蝉迟谤补蝉 many other 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺 householders who were devoted to their six-fold duties of yajana (performing a sacrifice for one's own good), 测腻箩补苍补 (officiating vedic sacrifices for the good of others), adhyayanam (study), 补诲丑测腻辫补苍补尘 (teaching), 诲腻苍补 (donate) and pratigraha (accepting gifts). In some cases during the medieval period, the temples occupied a lot of vast agricultural land.

Sometimes 尘补丑腻箩补苍补蝉 (moneylenders) would gift fallow land (wastelands) for the temple; sometimes gardeners of the temple garden were given a gift by the chiefs.^[77] Some inscriptions state that the kings together with the merchants donated lands to the temples.^[78] Sometimes the land was donated to feed the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉, ^[79] while gardens yielding of coconuts, mangoes, nuts, etc. were given to the temple to provide some of these for many years. There are also examples of land purchasesin the period under discussion.^[80] An inscription at Draksharama (c. 1121 CE) records the chiefs gifted lands to the farmers, who cultivated the land of devdaya. In addition to the land grants given to the royal staffs, grants were also given to other workers; who were either employed at the court or were persons of the king's choice. Sometimes village chiefs gifted land to landless village workers.^[81] Inscriptions in South India sometimes show that not the king but chiefs or royal officials gifted land to temples in different 惫颈峁�a测补s (districts),^[82] although this example is not very commonly noticeable in the inscriptions of North India. Again, maintaining previous grants was a common scenario in north Indian Sanskrit Inscriptions.^[83] Besides, lands were given to Buddhist or Jain institutions. However, in most cases, the vedic 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 were far ahead in the line of recipients.

Footnotes and references:

[back to top]

[1]:

Sima Yadav, The Myth of Indian Feudalism, p. 237.

[2]:

Loc. cit.

[3]:

Ibid., p. 236.

[4]:

Upinder Singh, Kings, 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺s and Temples in Orissa An Epigraphic Study Ad 300- 1147, p. 19.

[5]:

Odra, Andhra, Dravida, Kohkana were considered as Mleccha Country.

[6]:

Upinder Singh, op. cit., p. 20.

[7]:

碍腻艣测补辫补, Kashyapiyakrishisukti (A Treatise on Agriculture by Kashyapa), ed. & trans. S.M. Ayachit, p. 22.

[8]:

There was another type of donation for the temple which was called as Devadaya.

[9]:

USVAE , vol. III, p. 19.

[10]:

D.C. Sircar, Indian Epigraphy, p.434.

[11]:

USVAE, vol. III, pp. 184-186.

[12]:

Ibid., pp. 370-373.

[13]:

Ibid., vol. IV, part I, pp. 159-166

[14]:

Forty four 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉, Drona, Indravasu, Vatsa, Shash峁環i, Guhila-bha峁�峁璱 S奴ryya, Dinna bha峁�峁璱, Ludraka, 膧诲颈迟测补vasu, Dvi-顿谤辞峁嘺, Tr墨-顿谤辞峁嘺, Kum膩ra鈥撆沘rmm膩 -叠丑补峁�峁�颈, 膧诲颈迟测补, Ravi, U帽jhaka, Bappa峁璦ka, 惭腻迟谤墨鈥撆沘谤尘尘腻, 滨艣惫补谤补, Boppa蝉惫腻尘颈, Dvi-Bappa峁璦ka, Gopa, 顿腻尘补, Dv墨鈥揵hadra, Khokkhaka, 碍别艣补惫补, Gova艣armm膩, Agni艣armm膩, Dvi-Gopa, N膩vuvaka, Kum膩ra-nbhadra, S墨ha-Na峁�峁璦ka, Gi峁卝aka, Goggaka, 厂补峁単补尘补, Dvi-bha峁�峁璱, 叠丑腻苍耻.

[15]:

USVAE, vol. IV, part I, pp. 172-176.

[16]:

Ibid., pp. 681-687.

[17]:

Ibid., pp. 688-691.

[18]:

Ibid., pp. 418-425.

[19]:

Ibid., pp. 447-452.

[20]:

Ibid., pp. 501-507.

[21]:

Ibid., pp. 516-520.

[22]:

Ibid., pp. 560-568.

[23]:

Ibid., pp. 587-593.

[24]:

Ibid., pp. 593-600.

[25]:

Ibid., part II, pp. 29-36.

[26]:

Ibid., pp. 79-84.

[27]:

JBBRAS, vol. XX, p. 72.

[28]:

Ibid., p. 74.

[29]:

USVAE, vol. IV, part II, pp. 209-212.

[30]:

EI, vol. IV, p. 80.

[31]:

USVAE, vol. IV, part II, pp. 275-281.

[32]:

Ibid., pp. 349-354.

[33]:

Ibid., pp. 354-362.

[34]:

Ibid., pp. 524-529.

[35]:

JBBRAS, XI, p. 335.

[36]:

USVAE, vol. IV, part II, pp. 44-52.

[37]:

CII, vol. IV, p. 38.

[38]:

USVAE, vol. IV, part I, pp. 191-194.

[39]:

Ibid., pp. 47-54.

[40]:

Charak-膩ddhvaryyu Maitrayan墨ya-产丑补峁�峁�补
1. Madhus奴dan-op膩ddhy膩ya
2. Avanti-惫颈办谤补尘-辞辫腻诲诲丑测腻测补
3. Devasom-op膩ddhy膩ya
4. Sv膩midatt-op膩ddhy膩ya
5. Vish峁噓-ghosh-op膩ddhy膩ya
6. Sth膩var-op膩ddh瘸aya
7. Bhatta-Kamalapaksha蝉惫腻尘颈
8. 叠丑补峁�峁�补-Ravin膩ga蝉惫腻尘颈
9. 艢ambhubhava蝉惫腻尘颈
10. Ba峁僤hud峥﹙a-yora峁単a-Vish峁噓bhava蝉惫腻尘颈
11. 尝腻迟补-phaliha-蝉惫腻尘颈
12. 础艣辞办补-蝉惫腻尘颈
13. 艢谤墨诲丑补谤补-产丑奴迟颈-蝉惫腻尘颈
14. 艢墨lapaksha-蝉惫腻尘颈,
15. S膩pp奴paksha-蝉惫腻尘颈
16. 痴腻尘补苍补-蝉惫腻尘颈,
17. 狈腻驳补艣armma-蝉惫腻尘颈,
18. Gola-chandra-蝉惫腻尘颈,
19. Bhadra-蝉惫腻尘颈,
20. -22. Gopendra-蝉惫腻尘颈 and 痴腻尘补苍补鈥摬醣鼓宄揪� of 颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测补 肠补谤补峁嘺
23. Soma-蝉惫腻尘颈,
24. Yaj帽-蝉惫腻尘颈 and
25. unnatam膩gha-蝉惫腻尘颈

[41]:

1. 叠丑补峁�峁�颈-腻诲丑测腻辫补办补 (teacher) the 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 adherent of 膧艣惫补濒腻测补苍补 (school of 峁欢惫别诲补). Belonging to vatsa-sagotra and to 叠补岣�v峁沜丑补 i.e. 峁欢惫别诲补 who had migrated from Jamb奴sara and is resident in 艢ir墨shapadraka included in Akr奴re艣vara-惫颈峁�a测补 (the village granted).
2. Gop膩ditya,
3. 叠丑补峁�峁�颈-驳补峁嘺,
4. 痴颈蝉腻办丑补,
5. Agni艣armm膩
6. 顿谤辞峁嘺 (all the above six of Vatsa-sagotra)
7. 叠丑补峁�峁�颈-d膩ma and
8. Vatra of 碍腻艣测补辫补-sagotra (all the above eight belonged to 叠补岣�v峁沜丑补-肠补谤补峁嘺 (i.e) 峁欢惫别诲补 branch)
9. T膩pi艣armm膩(i)
10. T膩pi艣armm膩 (ii)
11. Datta蝉惫腻尘颈n
12. Bh膩gi-蝉惫腻尘颈n,
13. Pitri-艣补谤尘补苍
14. 叠丑补峁�峁�颈
15. 顿谤辞峁嘺, (all these Nos, 9-15 were of 顿补耻峁囜笉补办墨测补-蝉补驳辞迟谤补)
16. Kakka-补诲丑测腻辫补办补
17. And 膧buka of 顿丑奴尘谤腻测补峁嘺鈥搒补驳辞迟谤补,
18. 痴腻峁璦-艣补谤尘补苍
19. 艢补颈濒补
20. Ghosha
21. 惭补丑腻诲别惫补 and
22. 叠腻惫补 of 碍补耻峁囜笉颈苍测补-sagotra
23. Dhara
24. 痴颈艣腻办丑补
25. Nandi
26. R膩mila of 尘腻峁环补谤补-蝉补驳辞迟谤补
27. Dharmmadhara of 丑腻谤颈迟补-sagotra (all these Nos 9-27 were adhvarjus and adherents of 痴腻箩补蝉补苍别测补-艣腻办丑腻) (white Yajurveda), and 碍腻峁噕补 school
28. Indra鈥撆洸拱�尘补��
29. 膧诲颈迟测补-Ravi
30. T膩p[i艣奴ra
31. Indra艣奴ra
32. 滨艣惫补谤补 I
33. Dhara
34. 顿腻尘补dhara
35. 滨艣惫补谤补 II, All of whom鈥�(Nos,28-35) were adherent of 颁丑腻苍诲辞驳测补 (厂腻尘补) branch belonging to 产丑腻谤补诲惫腻箩补-蝉补驳辞迟谤补 and Kauthuma school (all the above-listed thirty five 产谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉 seem to have migrated from Jamb奴sar膩 and settle in 艢ir墨sha-padraka)
36. Bhandra
37. 痴腻测耻-艣补谤尘补苍 38. 顿谤辞峁嘺蝉惫腻尘颈n,
39. Rudr膩ditya and
40. P奴r峁囜箛a蝉惫腻尘颈n of the 笔颈辫辫补濒腻诲补 school belonging to C hauli-sagotra and adherents of 础迟丑补谤惫补峁嘺 branch (of the Vedas), residents of Bherajjik膩, having migrated from Bharukachcha.

[42]:

Ibid., pp. 523-529.

[43]:

Ibid., part II, pp. 153-157.

[44]:

Ibid., pp. 165-169.

[45]:

Ibid., vol. XXVI, p. 67.

[46]:

EI, vol. XXVII, p. 40.

[47]:

Ibid., pp. 270-274.

[48]:

EI, vol. XXXVII, p. 36.

[49]:

USVAE, vol. IV, part II, pp. 66-74.

[50]:

Ibid., vol. VII, pp. 322-333.

[51]:

EI, vol. XXV, p. 30.

[52]:

USVAE, vol. V, pp. 443-446.

[53]:

EI, vol. XXVI, p. 253.

[54]:

USVAE, vol. VI, pp. 110-121.

[55]:

USVAE, vol. VII, pp. 156-166.

[56]:

IA, vol. XII. p. 251.

[57]:

EI, vol. V, p. 196.

[58]:

IA, vol. VI, p. 52.

[59]:

USVAE, vol. VII, pp. 344-352.

[60]:

Ibid., pp. 365-369.

[61]:

EI, vol. XVIII, p. 323.

[62]:

IHQ, vol. VIII, p. 312.

[63]:

USVAE, vol. VII, pp. 466-469.

[64]:

EI, vol. XXIX, p. 89.

[65]:

USVAE, vol. VIII, pp. 78-84.

[66]:

S. Devadas Pillai, Indian Sociology Through Ghurye, a Dictionary, p. 48.

[67]:

Ibid., p. 131.

[68]:

Ibid., p. 132.

[69]:

Loc. cit.

[70]:

Ibid., p. 246.

[71]:

Ibid., p. 129.

[72]:

Ibid., p. 131.

[73]:

Ibid., p. 132.

[74]:

Ibid., p. 32.

[75]:

USVAE, vol. VII, pp. 250-255.

[76]:

B. Rajendra Prasad, Patterns of Community Settlements and Political Formation (A.D. 6241000), eds. I. Lakshmi and Santisri Banerjea, p. 124.

[77]:

An inscription from the temple of Srikalahasti (c. 1209 CE), in Indian epigraphy, p. 29.

[78]:

鈥淐heruvu-Madhavaram plates of Kali Vishnuvardhana鈥�, in EI, vol. XXXVII, pp. 141-142.

[79]:

Baloda Plates of Tivaradeva (c. 600 CE) issued by the King 惭补丑腻艣颈惫补-T墨vara of P膩峁囜笉uva峁兣沘 of South 碍艒蝉补濒补, USVAE, vol. IV, part I, pp. 54-57.

[80]:

L.D. Institute of Copper Plate of Dhruvas膿na II (c. 616-17CE), issued by the King Dhruvas膿na II of Maitrakas of 痴补濒补产丑墨 dynasty, USVAE, vol. IV, part I, pp. 688-691.

[81]:

Vipparla stone inscription dated c. 649 CE.

[82]:

An inscription from Saumyanatha temple at Nandalur (C. 1208 CE), The temple inscription from Visvesvara temple (c. 1172 CE).

[83]:

USVAE, vol. III, pp. 238-240 (c. 466 CE), ibid., vol. V, pp. 79-82 (c. 709 CE), ibid., vol. VII, pp. 156-166 (c. 930 CE).