THE GUPTA EMPIRE
Geographical and Political Conditions
The empire of the Guptas was one of the largest
in the history of ancient India. Before we go to examine the geographical
extent of the Gupta empire which varied from reign to reign of the Gupta Kings,
it is essential to survey briefly the circumstances and political conditions,
in the epoch immediately preceding that of the Gupta, for these very
circumstances led to the rise and consolidation of the Gupta kingdom which
later on developed into an empire.
The political picture of India towards the close
of the second and the beginning of the third century C.E. reflects the decline
of two great powers, the Kushanas in the north and the Satavahanas in the
south. The Kushana power was breaking up after the death of Vasudeva I whose
rule came to an end sometime between C.E. 180 and 240. Kushanas lost their hold
over the interior of India. However, their rule seems to have continued in
western Punjab and Kabul valley. In the southern Punjab and the Gangetic
plains, some old ruling powers and some new ones took advantage of the
weakening of the Kushana power and reasserted their supremacy once again. In
the south too, owing to the weakness of the later Satavahana rulers, their feudatories
and governors weaned themselves away from the central authority and laid the
foundation of small independent states. Thus, the country disintegrated into a
number of small states. Consequently we find during the third century C.E.
three great political powers viz. the Vakatakas, the Bharashiva Nagas and the
Guptas, rising in the country In the middle of the third century C.E.
Vakatakas established themselves in the Vindhyan
region. Their dominion included a major portion of Bundelkhand area of Madhya
Pradesh. Later on they shifted their power southwards in the Vidarbha region.
The western part of Madhyadesha saw the rise of the Bharashiva nagas with their
kingdom in Padmavati (Padampawaya in Madhya Pradesh). They claim to have held
the land upto the Ganga under their sway , And the third power i.e. the Guptas
established themselves in the eastern Uttar Pradesh towards the close of the
third century C.E.
Among these three the Guptas proved themselves
as the greatest power of the age. Founded by Maharaja Sri Gupta (C.E. 275-300)'
the Gupta kingdom initially included Varanasi and its adjoining region. This
can be attested by a Chinese tradition recorded in the account of Itsing.
According to which che-li-ki-to {Maharaja Sri Gupta) built a temple at mi-li-kia-si-kia-po-no
(Mrigashikhavana) for the residence of the Chinese pilgrims and granted 24
villages towards its recurring expenditure. Mrigashikhavana is identified with
the famous Buddhist place of pilgrimage Mrigadaya or the deer park near Samath and
China temple is located in its proximity somewhere within Varanasi. Maharaja
Sri Gupta's son Ghatotkacha who was a Maharaja like his father also ruled that
region. It was after him that his successors, known as the great conquerors and
statesmen of their age extended Gupta Kingdom and its political influence. By
conquests along with political strategies and diplomacy they build one of the
largest empires in the history of Ancient India which included the whole of
India north of Vindhyas and had a great influence over the south. Glorious days
of the Gupta kingdom began from C.E.319 which is the epoch of the Gupta era and
indicates the rise of Chandragupta I the son and successor of Ghatotkacha. In
this period Gupta kingdom was founded as sovereign state on a sure and firm
basis. Chandragupta I succeeded in enlarging it's territories to a considerable
extent. Unlike his father and grandfather who adopted the lesser title of
Maharaja, Chandragupta I assumed the title Maharajadhiraja which is symbolic of
suzerain power. One of the factors that helped him to power and prestige was
his connection by matrimonial alliance with the Lichchhavis, who were powerful
republican people ruled in Vaishali. His marriage to the Lichchhavi princess
Kumaradevi is evident by the Chandragupta Kumaradevi type coins of Chandragupta
I portraitmg Chandragupta and Kumaradevi with their names inscribed on the
obverse and the legend Lichchhavayah on the reverse, and by the Allahabad
Pillar inscription of Chandragupta's son and successor Samudragupta in which
latter is described as Lichchhavidauhitra, the son of Lichchhavi's daughter .
According to Vincent Smith, Lichchhavis at this time actually held Pataliputra
and through his marriage Chandragupta I succeeded to absorb the power of his wife's
relatives. Therefore, it can be said that two of the principalities of the
Eastern India, the state of Lichchhavis and the kingdom of the Guptas were
united by a matrimonial alliance and Chandragupta I thus acquired a
considerable kingdom.
No inscription or record of Chandragupta I so
far is available to give us any detail of the expansion of his kingdom. It is
only in the records of his successors that he is called Maharajadhiraja. We may
reasonably infer that his dominions must have been sufficiently large to
justify his assumption of the imperial title. It is generally held on the basis
of a passage in the Puranas that in the period of Chandragupta I the Gupta
territories comprised the region of Prayag-Allahabad; Saketoudh; and
Magadha-Bihar.
" Anu Ganga Prayagam Cha Saketam Magadham Statha
Etan janapadan Sarvan bhokshyante Guptavamsajah "
These Gupta dominions grew to an empire of great
magnitude under Chandragupta's son and successor Samudragupta who raised his
family to the status of a great imperial power in true senses. His Allahabad
Pillar inscription which is an eulogy on him composed by one of his offices
named Harishena provides an impressive list of kings and regions that succumbed
to Samudragupta's triumphal march across various parts of subcontinent. It is
evident from the inscription that Samudragupta's ambition was to establish an
extensive empire, and no doubt he laid a lasting foundation for a great one
which was one of the largest after the decline of the Mauryan empire. But here
we find a striking contrast between the Mauryan and Gupta empires which is
neatly pointed by the Allahabad Pillar inscription. Whereas the empire of the
Mauryas was an integrated one and was a centralised monarchy, an important
feature of which was the centralised control of the Mauryan government over
areas which gradually lost their independence and were included within an
extensive political system planned by this government.
Arthasastra the famous treatise of that age also
emphasizes the control of the central authority. Every detail of the
organization of the kingdom is fitted into the administrative plan and is aimed
at giving final control to the king . The evidences from the Asokan edicts also
indicates that the king had control over even the most remote part of the
empire. On the contrary, the study of the nature of the Gupta empire reveals
that it was largely formed by the subordinate states ruled by subordinate or
tributary rulers, often referred to in modern writings as feudatories. Most of
these states were subdued in pursuance of the policy of dharmavijaya i.e.
righteous conquest. This discouraged the annexation of a conquered territory
but recommended the acceptance of subordination by the defeated king. This
tendency is very old and deep-rooted in the Indian tradition and also received
the sanction of the smritis. According to Vishnu, "A king having conquered
the capital of his foe, should invest there a prince of royal race of that
country with the royal dignity". The Arthasastra differentiates between
dharmavijaya and lobhavijaya or Asuravijaya. A dharmavijayi was satisfied with
mere obeisance or surrender on the part of the conquered. The theory finds
elaborate expression in the works of Kalidasa who in his Raghuvamsa described
this policy as one of uprooting and replanting. The English translation is
provided below :
"They who lowly bowed down to his lotus
like feet and who (therefore) were reinstated after having been ousted,
honoured Raghu by presenting him with their wealth, like kalama plants which
are bent down to their roots and which presents fruits when they are
transplanted after having been first uprooted."
Raghuvamsa has a detailed account of the
conquest of many regions at the hands of Raghu. But nowhere is Raghu said to
have attempted the annexation of conquered territory. Another verse of Raghuvamsa states , whose English
translation is provided below
"The righteous conqueror took away the
wealth but not the territory of the lord of Mahendra, capture but
(subsequently) released".
Though brief, it is the best description of the
policy of Dharmavijaya. It was not a principle of purely academic interest, but
seems to have actually been followed. The Allahabad pillar inscription reveals
Samudragupta as following this ideal. No doubt he violently uprooted many petty
states around his own kingdom in the region of Gangayamuna doab in northern
India (Aryavarta) and created a consolidated empire. But this policy of
suppression was not applied in the case of many other kings and states
mentioned in the inscription. In Dakshina path, for instance, he adopted a
different policy. Twelve kings of south India ruling over the region along with
the eastern coast of Deccan from Orissa upto Kanchipuram (near modern Chennai)
were defeated by Samudragupta. they were captured (grahna); liberated (moksha);
and reinstated in their own kingdoms (anugraha). Here, one can notice close
kinship between the expression grahana-moksha-anugraha of Allahabad pillar
inscription and the phrase “ Grihit Pratimuktashya “ given by Kalidasa in
Raghuvamsa. Pratyantas i.e. five kingdoms and nine tribal territories located
on the borders of Samudragupta's kingdom in the north, east and western India
were forced to accept Gupta suzerainty. According to the Allahabad pillar
inscription these states sought submission to Samudragupta by rendering
satisfaction to his formidable rule with the payment of all tributes, execution
of orders and visit to his court to pay homage in person. “Sarvva-karadan-ajnakaranapranamagamana-paritoshita-prachanda-sasanasya.
“
The kings of forest kingdoms ( atavikarajya )
situated in the hilly and forest infested region of central India were forced into servitude, “ Paricharakikrita-sarva-atavika-rajasy
” . And more distant rulers such as the Daivaputra shahi-shahanu-shahi (Kushana
rulers to the west of the Indus), Saka Murundaih (the western Saka kshatrapas
of Gujarat and Saurashtra), Saimhalakadibhis-chasarwa-dvipa-vasibhir (the kings
of Sri Lanka and the dwellers of all the islands also acknowledged
Samudragupta's sovereignty. They sought to win the favour of the Gupta emperor
by rendering him many kinds of services as offering their personal attendance,
offering their daughters in marriage and request for the administration of
their own districts and provinces through the Garuda token, “ atmanivedana
kanyopayana-dana-garutmadanka svavisayabhukti sa(sana) (y) achanadyupaya
sevakrita “.
The influence of Samudragupta's imperial power
over these regions can be proved on the basis of some other independent
evidences. That some remnants of the Kushanas namely saka, shilada and Gadahara
rulers of central and western Punjab accepted his suzerainty is indicated by
some Gadahara coins which bears on its obverse the name Samudra written under
the arm of the king and the name Gadahara outside the spear . Regarding Simhala
or Sri Lanka, a Chinese source provide evidence that the Ceylonese king
Meghavarman sent presents and sought Samudragupta's permission to build a
Buddhist monastery at Bodhagaya. The required permission was granted .
Archaeological evidences, such as pieces of sculptures bearing the influence of
Gupta art as well as temples of Gupta style belonging to the same period
discovered in Java and Combodia suggest that 'dwellers of all the islands'
mentioned in the Allahabad Pillar inscription, very likely, refers in a general
way, to the Hindu Colonies in Malaya peninsula, Java, Sumatra and other islands
in Indian Archipelago , with which contacts had increased in this period.
This is further supported by the narratives of
Fa-hien, according to whom Tamralipti in Vanga was a busy port for active sea
borne communication with Sri Lanka and other islands of the Pacific Ocean.
Therefore, the reference to the homage paid by the dwellers of all other
islands should not be treated as mere rhetoric It may be based on actual
relationship with some of them, the exact nature of which, however, cannot be
ascertained. The foregoing survey enables us to know the nature and the extent
of Samudragupta's empire. His direct political rule was confined to the
Ganga-Yamuna plain which was the prime Magadhan territory, the heart of the
Gupta empire.
Other neighbouring and distant powers were
subdued and were brought under various degrees of subjection. He did not
attempt to bring all of them under his direct rule but contented with having
established his overlordship over them; and in doing so, he not only followed
the political ideology of Dharmavijaya but showed the wise and political vision
of a great statesman. He did not try to annex the frontier kingdom and tribal
states and retained them as faithful tributaries. Instead of indulging in a
harder task of their conquest, he patronised them as buffer states against the
foreign powers and added strength to the defence of his empire.
The Sakas and Kushanas were overawed by the
colossal military might of Samudragupta and thought it better to establish
diplomatic relations with him. On the other hand Samudragupta also realised his
limitations and thought it politic to abide by this alliance and consolidated
his position in the newly conquered areas at home rather than venture fresh
conquests in the far off lands of Saurashtra and the regions beyond the Indus.
However, from the statement in the Allahabad Pillar inscription, it is clear
that this alliance of friendship was not based on equality. It is highly
probable, even if we make an allowance for exaggeration on the part of
Harishena, the author of the eulogy, that the Sakas along with the Kushanas
were reduced to the status of tributary states.
The kings of forest region {atavika) in central
India were also placed in the state of subordination. Thus, the territory under
the direct administration of Samudragaupta included in the east , the whole of
Bengal, excepting its south-east portion. Its northern boundary ran along the
foothills of the Himalaya, and in the west its limit extended upto the
territories of the republican states of the west and north-west of India. While
the kingdoms of forest region stretched over the hilly tracts of central India,
the states of South along the eastern coast of Deccan and the frontier states
of the Gupta empire situated in the south-eastern Bengal (Bangaldesh), Assam,
Nepal, Uttrakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Northern Maharashtra, Southern Rajasthan,
Haryana and western Punjab acknowledged the suzerainty of Samudragupta and
served as faithful tributaries of the Gupta empire. Accepting suzerainty of the
Gupta emperor did not mean transformation in the method of administration, or
change of royal dynasty. Subordinate states retained their individuality, their
institutions and organization, their system of administration and government.
The visible manifestation of their subordinate capacity consisted in periodical
payments of tributes and presents, attendance of their suzerain's court, and
absence of separate foreign relations. In other respects these states were
given a free hand to act for themselves. Generally, subordinate states remained
faithful to the empire but always waiting for the opportune moment to throw off
the yoke. Only a capable monarch with his strong central government could
prevent the disruptive tendencies of these states and their mutual dissensions.
So long as the emperors were at the helm of affairs, these states place
themselves in a state of subordination. But when once these towering
personalities disappeared from the arena of the imperial stage, there was
opportunity for the subordinate states to declare their independence. That was
exactly what happened after Samudragupta whose reign came to an end in about
C.E. 375. Samudragupta was succeeded by his son Ramagupta who is known from his
Vidisha stone image inscriptions which mention him as Maharajadhiraja, and by
his copper coins from Eran-Vidisha region in Madhya Pradesh and Jhansi in Uttar
Pradesh. Ramagupta was a weak ruler and he could not control saka rebellion in
western India. It was after his complete discomfiture at the hand of a saka
adversary that he was overthrown by his brother Chandragupta II.
The ingnominal episode of Ramagupta and Sakas is
described in many literary and epigraphical sources of the Gupta and later
period. From these descriptions, it appears that Sakas i.e., western kshatrapas
of Gujarat and Saurashtra who were in terms of subordinate alliance with the
Gupta empire during the period of Samudragupta, rebelled after him and
Ramagupta had to engage in a war with the saka king during the course of which
he came within the strangle hold of the enemy, who would spare his life and
allow him to retire only on the condition of the surrender of his wife,
Dhruvadevi. Ramagupta agreed to this condition but his brother Chandragupta
objected such act of cowardness and in order to save the honour of his family
he went to the enemy camp in female disguise to kill the Saka lord and actually
killed him. Later he killed Ramagupta, seized the Gupta throne and married
Dhruvadevi whom he rescued from the voluptuous enemy . The date of Chandragupta
II's accession can be regarded either C.E. 375-76 or C.E. 380-381 on the basis
of his earliest known record viz. Mathura stone pillar inscription dated G.
year 61/C.E. 380- 81.
Of all the Gupta kings Chandragupta II is
reputed to have shown exceptional chivalrous and heroic qualities. He assumed
the title of Vikramaditya-son of prowess, which occurs on his gold coins . His
long reign of about thirty years saw the consolidation of the Gupta empire. He
not only maintained the vast empire, carved out by his father but also extended
it's boundaries and influence in all directions. It is evident from different
sources that Chandragupta II adopted a slightly different policy from that
followed by his father Samudragupta.
We find that he undertook various military
campaigns which led to the annexation of many subordinate states of the time of
Samudragupta. An important epigraph viz. Mehrauli Pillar inscription of Chandra
which by consensus of opinion is assigned to Chandragupta II provides
invaluable information about his reign. It gives the account of his military
activities in different parts of India and beyond its frontiers. It is evident
from this inscription that Chandragupta II's victorious arms penetrated as far
as the eastern limits of India. According to the description a battle was fought
in Vanga territory against a confederacy of kings in which Chandra
(Chandragupta II) displayed extraordinary valour and defeated the enemies,
“Yasy-odvarttayatah-pratipam-urasa-sattrun-samety-agatan-Vangeshv-ahava-varttino-bhilikhita-khadgena-
kirttir-bhuje- "
on whose arm fame was inscribed by the sword,
when in battle in the Vanga territory, he dashed back with his breast the
enemies who, uniting together, came upon (him)".
Vanga denotes south-eastern Bengal, very nearly
to the same country as Samtata which was included in the tributary frontier
states of Samudragupta. We do not know whether there was a rebellion in Bengal
and its adjoining areas, or whether the war was caused by the aggressive
imperial policy of Chandragupta II which sought to incorporate the region into
the dominions directly administered by him. In any case it was probably as a
result of this campaign that direct Gupta rule was established in this region,
for we know that early in the sixth century C.E. a Gupta king namely Vainyagupta
was ruling in this part of eastern India. From the information provided by the
Mehrauli Pillar inscription it is also evident that Chandragupta II undertook a
military expedition against some of the subordinate states of south India. It
seems that they raised their heads against the Gupta empire in this period and
by this expedition Chandragupta II brought some of them under his direct
control. But about this the inscription does not refer anything explicitly, it
only mentions that "by the breezes of whose valour the southern ocean is
still perfumed "
yasyad-y-apy-adhivasyate-Jalanidhir-wiryy-anilairddakshinah “. But we may trace
an echo of this great south eastern expedition in the Puranas which speak of
the extension of Gupta rule over Kosala i.e. South Kosala, Odra, Pundra,
Tamralipti and Puri on the sea board by Devarakshita i.e., Devagupta or
Chandragupta II. About Pundra i.e. Pundravardhana, it is evident from the
Damodarpur copper plate grants of the period of Kumaragupta I, Buddhagupta and
Vishnugupta, that it had been an important and integral province of the Gupta
empire. Gupta suzerainty over South Kosala is evident by the reference to the
famous imperial title of Gupta i.e. Paramabhattaraka in the Kursud copper plate
grant of Maharaja Narendra of Sharabhapuria dynasty of this region,
Chandragupta II broke the power of republican tribal states which were allies
of Samudragupta and acted as buffer states at the north-west and western
frontiers of the Gupta empire.
It can be safely admitted that these states were
assimilated in the empire by Chandragupta II. For we do not find any record,
nor any mention of any one of them in the history of ancient India hence
onwards. Apart from this, on the basis of a statement of Kalhana in
Rajatarangini (C.E. 1148-49), which refers that on the death of Hiranya,
Vikramaditya appointed Matrigupta, as the governor of Kashmir. P.L. Gupta
states that in northern India the region upto Kashmir was brought under the
direct rule of Gupta empire by Chandragupta II. In the west Chandragupta II had
conquered and assimilated Gujarat and Saurashtra region into the organization
of the empire.
We know this region was under the Sakas or
Western Kshtrapas and the expedition against them had become an imperative
necessity after Ramagupta and Saka episode as a consequence of which the Sakas
began to be looked upon as a potential danger to be rooted out at the earliest
opportunity. No details of the expedition are available but we can be sure that
the Saka ruler defeated by Chandragupta II was most probably Rudrasimha III.
The approximate period of this conquest can be established with the help of the
numismatic evidence. The latest available date on the silver coins of
Rudrasimha III is either 310 or 319 (the unit figure is lost) of the Saka era
which correspond to C.E. 388 and 397. Again the earliest known date on
Chandragupta II's silver coins which he issued in imitation of the Saka coins
is G. year 90/C.E. 409. Therefore, we can safely place Chandragupta II’s
conquest of the Saka dominions between C.E. 388 & C.E. 409. About this
great campaign which led to the annexation of western India R.N. Saletore says,
If the Devi Chandraguptam can be relied upon to enshrine the historical
incidents of the relations between Ramagupta and his wife Dhruvadevi, the Saka
ruler must have revolted and was conquered by Chandragupta II.
The conquest of Western Kshtrapas however must
have been affected by Chandragupta II, for his rare silver coins are more or
less direct in imitations of those of the latest of Western Kshatrapas. By this
campaign the Gupta emperor put an end to the domination of the western
kshatrapas from western India which had lasted in these parts for about three
centuries. Its significance lay not only in the western borders of the Gupta
empire being secure but also in its giving access to the western trade since
the ports were now in Gupta hands.
Thus, by his great conquering ability and valour
Chandragupta II consolidated Gupta empire and extended his direct rule over a
vast region. Besides northern India which was already under the Gupta hegemony,
the whole of Bengal and a large portion of Orissa in the east and south east
respectively were now under the Gupta's control. In the south the boundaries of
the Gupta empire extended upto Vindhyas and in the west the whole region upto
Arabian sea which was previously ruled by different republican tribal states
and by the Sakas was now administered by the Gupta officials. Following his
aggressive imperial plans and his object to 'conquer the whole world' ,
Chandragupta II carried his arms successfully in the Trans-Indus region after
his victory in Saurashtra. The Mehrauli Pillar inscription records that
Chandragupta II conquered Vahlikas after crossing the seven mouths of Indus- “
Tirtva sapta mukhani yenasamare sindhor-jjitva Vahlika.”
The place Vahlika is almost certainly identified
with Bactria or modern Balkh in north eastern Afghanistan. But different
opinions have been expressed regarding the identification of the people who
occupied Vahlika or Bactria in this period.
R.C.Majumdar has identified them with the
Kushanas at one place. But now it is known certainly that the Kushanas under
their king Kidara had moved out of Bactria in the middle of the fourth century
C.E. under the mounting pressure of the Juan-Juan tribe and settled in the
Kabul valley about this time. The Juan-Juan tribe has been identified with the
Chionites or Hunas who had occupied Bacteria. Therefore, Hunas were the people
against whom Chandragupta II led his military expedition in Vahlika or Bactria.
On the basis of some verses in Raghuvamsa some scholars have proposed to equate
the account of the north -western conquest of Raghu recorded in the Raghuvamsa
with the conquest of Bactrians (Vahlikas) described in the Mehrauli Pillar
inscription. They suggested that Chandragupta II adopted a land route in his
military expedition against the Vahlikas which lay through Saurashtra to
southern Afghanistan via Trans-Indus region and during this expedition he came
close to the north-eastern fringe of the Sassanian empire, where according to
Kalidasa he defeated the Parasikas or Persians.
The English translated verses are provided below
:
"Thence he set out by an inland route to
conquer the Parsis (Persians) as proceeds an ascetic to conquer, by the
knowledge of truth the enemies called senses"
"He covered the earth with their bearded
heads, severed by his bhalla arrows, as with fly covered heaps of honey
combs."
The bearded Persian warriors mentioned by
Kalidasa have been identified by the scholars with the Sassanians and it is
suggested that hence forward Chandragupta II headed northwards reached Bactria
or Vahlika, where he had a battle with the Hunas on the river oxus. This
suggestion is based on the following verses of Raghuvamsa.
The English translated verse is provided below :
"Thence Raghu, like the sun taking up the
sap (of the earth) by his rays, careered towards the direction of Kubera (i.e.
the northern direction) extirpating the northerns with his arrows."
We find another verse that seems to connect our
understanding , the English translated verse :
"There the exploits of Raghu, the power of
which was clearly seen in (the slaughter of) the husbands of young women in the
inner apartments of the Huna kings, proved a teacher of the ruddiness in their
cheeks."
Thus, Chandraguta II subdued the Hunas with his
might and extended Gupta influence in such a remote region outside India. By
his aggressive policy he reestablished the prestige and glory of the Gupta
empire, which was on the verge of disintegration and collapse after the defeat
of Ramagupta. Besides the frontiers of the empire were made immune from any
danger of a foreign invasion as the Sakas Kushanas and even the Hunas had been
cut to size, the war having been carried to their very home and fought on their
soil.
To these military achievements of Chandragupta
II may be added that his matrimonial and diplomatic alliances played an
important role in his policy towards other contemporary states. He seems to be
well aware of the political advantage of the matrimonial alliance. He knew how
such an alliance with the Lichchhavis helped his grandfather Chandragupta I to
rise to imperial position. An important alliance, perhaps of Chandragupta Ii’s
time was his marriage with the Naga princes Kuberanaga. However some scholars
are not inclined to attach any political importance to this marriage, for the
Nagas had lost their importance in this period and were a political non-entity
.
The most important matrimonial alliance
contracted by Chandragupta II was with the Vakatakas who, in this period
emerged as a dominant power in the Deccan earlier held by the Satavahanas.
Chandragupta II felt their strength and realising the value and importance of
their alliance he arranged the marriage of his daughter Prabhavatigupta with
the Vakataka crown prince Rudrasena II, son of Prithivishena I. It was a
remarkable strategic move on the part of Chandragupta II who foresaw that the
powerful Vakataka king of south-western Deccan could be of great help to him in
his campaign against the Saka Kshatrapas of Saurashtra and their hostility
could easily prove to be a serious embarrassment.
Therefore, this matrimonial alliance was
deliberately made with a political object. Besides, this marriage strengthened
Gupta access to the Deccan, although the Vakatakas remained an independent
power. Rudrasena II, the son-in-law of Chandragupta II had a short reign and
died in C.E.390 .After his death the rule of Prabhavatigupta as the regent
queen of her minor sons continued for about twenty years and during this period
the Gupta emperor exercised great influence on the Vakataka kingdom. It is
evident by the Vakataka inscriptions of this period which commence with the
Gupta genealogy instead of the Vakatakas. Most likely Chandragupta II gave
Prabhavatigupta all help to run the Vakataka administration properly by
deputing his own civil and military
officers to the Vakataka court .
Another matrimonial relationship with the Gupta
family had been established by the Kadamba ruler Kakutsthavarman. It is evident
by the Talagund stone Pillar inscription wherein Kakutsthavarman is said to
have caused to blossom the lotus beds in the form of the families of rulers,
the foremost among whom were the Guptas .The inscription says,
“Guptadiparttthiva-kulamburuhasthalani-snehadara-pranaya-sambhrama-kesarani\Srimantyanekanripashatpada-sevitani\Yo=bodhyadduhitri-didhitibhir-nrirparkkah \
\ "
“This sun of a king by means of his rays-his
daughters caused to expand the splendid lotus-groups-the royal families of the
Guptas and others, the filaments of which were attachment, respect, love and
reverence (for him), and which were cherished by many bees -the kings (who
served them)."
In this inscription the name of the Gupta
emperor is not mentioned but as Kakutsthavarman ruled between C.E.405 and 435,
the Gupta king who contracted this matrimonial alliance with the Kadamba ruler
might have been either Chandragupta II or Kumaragupta I.
Besides matrimonial alliances Chandragupta II
established diplomatic relations with some other southern powers. It is
suggested from a Kavya called Kuntalesvara Dautyam, now lost, some verses from
which have been preserved in the literary works of the later period, that
Chandragupta II had successfully exerted his influence over the Kuntala king
and established friendly relation with him with the assistance of Kalidasa, who
went there as his emissary. Some scholars identified the king of Kuntala with
Srikrishnavarman while some other with Devaraja of the Rashtrakuta family of
Manapura. By these alliance Chandragupta II extended Gupta influence in south
India. His last known date i.e. G.Year 93/C.E 412-13 comes from his Sanchi
stone inscription . He left a vast empire for his successors which actually
stretched from Bengal in the east to Gujarat and Kathiwad in the west and from
Himalaya in the north upto Narmada in the south. He was most probably succeeded
by his son Maharaja Sri Govindagupta who is known from the Basarah clay sealing
of his mother Mahadevi Dhruvasvamini the chief queen of Chandragupta II; and
from the Mandasor stone slab inscription dated in the Malava year 524/C.E. 467
which point out that like his father Govindagupta was an imperial Gupta ruler
to whom a large number of kings paid homage; and whose armies under the command
of his general wiped out all opposing
armies .
Govindgupta enjoyed a very short region between
G.Year 93/C.E 412-13, the last known date of Chandragupta II and G.Year 96/C.E.
415-16, the first available date of Kumaragupta I, another son of Chandragupta
II. When Gupta empire passed on to Kumaragupta I it was on its most glorious
stage. Kumaragupta I's long region of over forty years was by far the most
prosperous period in the total rule of the Gupta dynasty. He assumed the title
Mahendraditya and proclaiming himself as a paramount sovereign he celebrated
the Asvamedha sacrifice as an assertion of his paramountcy . Hence it may be
concluded thiat he should have added more territories to the empire, though
none of the records of his conquests is available to us. However, some epigraphic
and literary evidences provides us some information in this regard. The
Mandasor inscription of the guild of silk weavers contains a specific mention
of the Gupta sovereign Kumaragupta I who was ruling over the earth while the
Varman ruler Bandhuvarman was protecting the town of Dasapura in the Year C.E.
436 . This shows that Kumaragupta I had extended Gupta suzerainty over the
region of Dasapura and Bandhuvarman ruled over this region as a Gupta
feudatory.
On the basis of statement in Puranas that
Mahendra (i.e. Kumaragupta I) added Kalinga and Mahishaka to his kingdom, P.L.
Gupta suggests that Kumaragupta I eliminated some of the south-eastern
feudatories of the time of his grandfather Samudragupta. Thus, the empire
continued to progress in Kumaragupta I's reign and he was able to retain every
inch of territory. Only a strong and efficient administration could have kept
the vast empire so thoroughly intact. The inscriptions of this period indicate
the development of the administrative machinery in different regions of the
empire.
It is also evident by these inscriptions that
Kumaragupta I was a strong administrator and was sagacious in the selection of
his governors and viceroys for the different provinces from amongst the princes
of the blood royal, ministers and officers. Damodarpur copper plate grants
dated G. year 124/C.E 442-43 and G. year 128/C.E 446-47 inform us that the
governor (uparika) appointed by Kumaragupta I himself was governing the
province of Pundaravardhana. Ghatotkachagupta, a prince of royal blood probably
a son of emperor himself, was the viceroy of Eastern Malava as is known from
the Tumain fragmentary inscription ". The Baigram copper plate grant tells
us that the Kumaramatya Kulavriddhi was administering the district of
Panchanagari (modern Panchili in the Bogra district of Bangladesh). These
administrative measures ensured the stability and integration of the empire.
But as indicated by the Junagadh rock
inscription of the G.year 136 /C.E 455-56 and the Bhitari Pillar inscription of
Skandagupta, the son and successor of Kumaragupta I that either towards the
close of the latter's reign or immediately after his death Gupta empire had met
with serious reverses and crisis was brought about by the invasion of the
Pushyamitras and the Hunas.
Pushyamitra tribe is unknown to epigraphic
records but known to the Puranas which record thirteen kings of the Pushyamitra
dynasty and they have been placed in the third century C.E. by Pargiter. Fleet
made the suggestion that they were a tribe on the Narmada region . They had
built up a strong military power and the resources for a war. The sudden
upheaval and the severity with which Pushyamitras fought, temporarily affected
the prestige of imperial Gupta power. It is evident from the Bhitari Pillar
inscription that at the initial stage Pushyamitras made the struggle so grim
even for a heroic warrior like Skandagupta that he had to pass a whole night on
bare ground but ultimately he tided over the critical situation and emerged
victorious As far as Hunas or Mlechchhas (as they referred to by the Junagadh
rock inscription were concerned, we know that they had occupied Bactria about
C.E.350 and under their pressure the Kushanas known as Kidarites after their
chief Kidara, had to move southwards into Gandhara and occupied Kabul valley.
Kalidasa in his Raghuvamsa also placed the Hunas
on the banks of the river Oxus where they were defeated by Raghu. One section
of them though subject to the JuanJuan tribe for a time, became very powerful
about the middle of the fifth century C.E. This branch is referred to in the
Greek accounts as white Hunas, but also called ye-tha, Hephthalites or
Ephthalites from the name of their ruler's family. From the bank of the Oxus
these Hunas invaded both Persia and India. They overthrew Kidara Kushanas from
Gandhara and occupied that region sometime in the fourth decade of the fifth
century C.E. Either before G.year 138/C.E.457-458 or most probably before
G.year 136 /C.E. 455-56, they crossed the Indian frontier. They were terrible
warriors and became a real threat to the Gupta empire. But their advance was
halted by the valiant Gupta emperor Skandagupta who inflicted upon them a
crushing defeat after fighting a terrible battle and saved the Gupta empire from
the scourge of a cruel and barbaric foe. The verses of Bhitari Pillar
inscription describing Skandagupta's conflict with the Hunas, leave no doubt
that the struggle was severe. The utter discomfiture
of the Hunas is borne out by the fact that for nearly half a century the Indian
frontiers were immune from this menace. From the provenance of Skandagupta's
inscriptions located at Junagadh in Gujarat, Kahaum in the Gorakhpur district,
and at Indore in the Bulandshahar district in Uttar Pradesh, it is inferred
that the Gupta empire did not suffer even a temporary eclipse in its extent and
limits but was in all its glory and tranquility. These inscriptions also bear
testimony that the Gupta government continued in the western provinces, eastern
provinces and the central provinces as well. While the western province of
Saurashtra was governed by Pamadatta who was appointed by Skandagupta
himself," the Vishaya of Antarvedi (the country lying between the Ganga
and Yamuna'' or the region of Kanauj lying between the Ganga and Yamuna,
commonly called Doab)'" was administered by the Vishyapati
Sarvanaga".
Thus, the Gupta empire was the undisputed
possession of one master whose commands were implicitly obeyed by the governors
appointed by him, from one end to the other of this vast region. Skandagupta's
last known date is G. year 148 /C.E. 467 . After his death, the central
authority of the Guptas declined at an increasing pace. A number of seals of
administrative offices have been discovered with the name of various kings
whose succession is uncertain. The varied order of succession points to the
confusion prevailed in the Gupta dynasty at that time. Skandagupta's immediate
successor was most probably his brother Ghatotkachagupta who, as referred to by
the Tumain inscription of the G. year 116/C.E. 435 had ruled as a governor of
Eastern Malava in the period of his father Kumaragupta I. Besides this
inscription, he is also known from his Basarh clay sealing and his two gold
coins one of which contains his name as Ghato and the marginal legend
Kramaditya}. Because of the existence of the two gold coins of Ghatotkachgupta
it has to be conceded that he did assume royal authority for sometime, but when
and how long are questions that remain to be answered. For now, it can be said
that most probably after a brief rule he was either ousted or died. He was
succeeded by his brother Purugupta. No inscription of this ruler has been
discovered so far. Purugupta's name with the title Maharajadhiraja and as a son
of the Gupta emperor Kumaragupta I is known to us from the Nalanda clay
sealings of the former's sons namely Budhagupta and Narsimhagupta and from the
Bhitari silver-copper seal and the Nalanda clay sealing of his grandson
Kumaragupta III .
Some gold coins with the legend Prakashaditya
are also attributed to Purugupta' . Besides, there are other kings known from
coins and inscriptions whose position in the Gupta family is not known with
certainty. One is Kumaragupta II who ruled in G. year 154/C.E. 473 as known
from the Samath Buddha image inscription. He bore the title Kramaditya which is
inscribed on his gold coins of Archer type. Thus, there is hardly any doubt
that Ghatotkachagupta, Purugupta and Kumaragupta II did reign but we have no
definite knowledge of the events of their period. The obscurity lifts with the
accession of Budhagupta the son of Purugupta. His earliest known date is G.
year 157/C.E. 477 which we get from the Samath Budha image inscription. An
inscription discovered on a stone pillar from Raj ghat also belongs to the
reign of Maharajadhiraja Budhagupta. Yet another copper plate grant dated 159
obviously of the Gupta era though does not mention the name of Budhagupta as
the reigning emperor but the date coupled with the mention in line 16 of the
fact that one sixth of the religious merit of this donation accrued to the
Paramabhattaraka, clearly shows that the ruling authority in the region was the
emperor Budhagupta whose title Paramabhattaraka Maharajadhiraja and name we get
in two Damodarpur copper plate grants from west Dinajpur district of west
Bengal .
One of these dated G. year 163/C.E. 481 while in
other the date has lost. These grants record pious householders purchasing land
from the government for building temples or for settling brahmana families. An
important inscription inscribed on the Eran stone pillar, which records the
setting up of this pillar as a flagstaff of Vishnu (garuda-dhvaja) by two
brothers viz. Maharaja Matrivishnu and his younger brother Dhanyavishnu,
contains a mention of a governor named Surashmichandra under Budhagupta, who
was governing the entire region lying between the river Yamuna and Narmada in
the G. Year 165 /C.E. 483 .
Besides this, a Budha image inscription from
Mathura dated in Budhagupta'a reign shows that his authority extended as far
north as Mathura. All these evidences prove beyond the possibility of any doubt
that Budhagupta's authority extended over those parts of Gupta empire which were
ruled over by the Gupta emperors previously, and that the empire had suffered
no loss of territory as yet. However, some indication of the loosening of the
imperial authority can be sensed in the existence of some land grants made
during Budhagupta's rule, where any reference to the emperor and central
government has been omitted. Two copper plate land grants dated G. year 158/
C.E. 478 issued by a Maharaja Lakshmana whose jurisdiction appears to have
extended over some territory in the neighbourhood of Prayag. The inscription
records the grant of an agrahara in the village Phela-parvvatika, situated very
close to Kaushambi.
The facts that the agrahara grant was made by
Maharaja Lakshamana in Prayag region which had been an integral part of the
Gupta empire from the time of Chandragupta I and that it does not contain even
a faint reference to the contemporary Gupta suzerain Budhagupta is conclusive
enough to prove the Gupta emperor's slackening of the revenue and
administrative rights in Prayag region which implies the weaking of the
imperial authority of the Guptas in this part of northern India.
Similarly, we find a few more feudatory
dynasties, which appeared to have become independent or semi-independent by
this time. In central India, except Maharaja Harivarman of the Maukhari
dynasty, who mentions the name of his overlord Buddhagupta in his Shankarpur
(Siddhi district Madhya Pradesh) Copper plate grant of the G.Year 168/C.E. 486,
other feudatory rulers do not make mention of the sovereignty of the Gupta
emperor. The Parivrajaka Maharajas, who had been Gupta feudatories for
generations in the Atavika region and ruled in Bundelkhand area had ceased to
acknowledge the Gupta supremacy in this period. Maharaja Hastin (C.E. 476-516)
of this family issued land grants without mentioning Gupta emperor Budhagupta,
making only a general reference to the Gupta sovereignity . Continguous to the
Parivrajaka kingdom was another principality with Uchchakalpa (modern city of
Nagod, in the Satna district of Madhya Pradesh) as the capital. Maharaja
Jayanatha of this dynasty issued land grants in the G. year 174/C.E. 493 and
C.E 496.
It is indicated from the locality and the use of
the Gupta era that this kingdom was once included in the Gupta empire but as
Jayanatha's grants do not contain any reference to the Gupta sovereignty, it is
probable that by C.E. 493 he had ceased to owe any allegiance to it. Similarly,
the grant made by Maharaja Subandhu from the ancient town of Mahishmati
(Maheshwar in Madhya Pradesh) on the Narmada in the G.year 167/C.E 486 is also
indicative of the loss of Gupta authority, for it makes no reference to the
contemporary Gupta sovereign Budhagupta. The story in western parts of the
empire was not much different. Saurashtra, which had been an important province
of the Gupta empire administered by its governors had become a feudatory state
ruled by Maitraka dynasty from their capital at Vallabhi. We know that in the
period of Skandagupta, Pamadatta was appointed as the governor of Saurashtra .
It is very likely that along with the appointment of Pamadatta as the civilian
governor, Bhattaraka, the founder of the Maitraka dynasty was appointed as a
general in this province. Bhattaraka was succeeded by his son Dharasena at this
part as per practice in the Gupta empire. Both are called Senapati in the
records of their successors . Bhattaraka's second son Dronasimha in his
Bhamodra Mohota copperplate inscription dated G. year 183/C.E. 502 assumed the
title Maharaja generally used by the feudatories in this period. It is claimed
in the inscriptions of this dynasty that the paramount ruler in person
installed him in royalty by a regular ceremony.
As Dronasimha was ruling over Saurashtra in C.E
502, the paramount ruler, referred to was most probably the Gupta emperor
Budhagupta. Thus, Dronasimha became a feudal chief rather than an imperial
officer and though the family still paid nominal allegiance to the Gupta
emperor, the Maitrakas of Vallabhi were well on the way to setting up an
independent kingdom. These instances show that while outwardly the Gupta empire
suffered no diminution in its extent, and its authority was still acknowledged
as far as the Bay of Bengal in the east the Arabian sea in the west and the
river Narmada in the south, its power and prestige had considerably declined
and some of its provinces located in western central and northern India were
enjoying a semi-independent status.
Budhagupta seems to have died shortly after C.E.
494 or in C.E. 499, for among his latest silver coins five are dated G. year
175/C.E. 494' and on the sixth the date has been read as G. year 180/C.E. 499.
But this reading is doubtful. Soon after his death we find that Epthalites or
the white Hunas who had faced a crushing defeat at the hands of Skandagupta appeared
again on the Indian soil. In C.E. 484 Hunas ended their long struggle against
Sassanian or Persian empire by defeating Persian king Piroz or Firoz, and by
the end of the fifth century C.E. they ruled over a vast empire with their
principal capital at Balkh or Bactria.
Now they turned their covetous eyes towards
India and soon crossed the Indian frontier under their king Toramana and lodged
themselves in north-western Punjab as is indicated by a stone inscription
discovered from kura or khewra in the Salt Range in the district of Jhelum,
which mentions Rajadhiraja Toramana, ruling over this region. Having
consolidated his position in Punjab Toramana advanced towards the interior of
India and invaded the Gupta territory. At this time, most probably Maharajadhiraja
Vainyagupta was ruling over the Gupta empire. He succeeded Budhagupta sometimes
about C.E. 500 and is known from his Gunaighar copper plate grant dated G. year
188/C.E 507 from his gold coins and the fragmentary Nalanda clay sealing.
Vainyagupta could not defend his empire as his
great predecessors had done and Huna leader Toramana conquered a large part of
western and central India. Even Airikina (Eran) Vishaya in the Eastern Malava
was included in his dominions. Toramana's conquest of Airikina is indicated by
the mention of his regnal year and name as the ruling Maharajadhiraja in the
Eran stone Boar inscription recording the building of a temple of god Varaha by
Dhanyavishnu, who along with his elder brother Maharaja Matrivishnu is also known
from the Eran stone pillar inscription, erecting flag staff of god Vishnu in
the same temple complex in the period of Budhagupta. Thus, it is evident that
the transfer of political authority in Airikina had taken place within a very
short period after the setting up of the pillar in honour of Vishnu in the G.
year 165/C.E. 484 We can safely admit that C.E. 500 , the Vishaya of Airikina
or perhaps a substantial part of Eastern Malava had been lost by the Guptas and
had passed into the hands of Hunas.
And as that was not enough, it is also evident
from a few Bengal inscriptions that either in the period of Vainyagupta or
shortly after him, Gupta authority in some regions of Bengal was decaying. As
we have found Vainyagupta ruling over a part of East Bengal (now Bangladesh) in
C.E. 507 but shortly after this date Maharaja Vijayasena, who was the
administrator in this region on behalf of Vainyagupta, figures in the
Mallasural copper plate grant as a feudatory of one Maharajadhirja Gopachandra
in the Vardhamana bhukti .
It shows that in this region an independent
Kingdom had come into existence under Gopachandra. It is further conformed by
the Faridpur copper plate grant of Mahrajadhiraja Dharmaditya who may be placed
before Goapchandra. Meanwhile, in central India Guptas were still making
attempts to organize resistance to the Hunas and to regain control over that
region. For we find the Huna suzerainty over Eastern Malava being challenged by
one of the member of the Gupta family named Bhanugupta some time before setting
up of the memorial stone pillar inscription at Eran in G. year 191/ C.E 510
commemorating the death of Maharaja Goparaja (probably a Gupta feudatory) in
the battle. In this brief record Bhanugupta's heroic deeds have been equated
with those of the epic hero Arjuna and he is called Raja Mahan.
As generally accepted, it appears that the
battle fought by Bhanugupta and Goparaja at Eran, referred to in this
inscription was against the Huna king Toramana , We can not anticipate any
other enemy against whom the Gupta armies would have been sent to Eastern Malava.
For we know definitely from the Eran
stone pillar inscription of the G. year 165 and the Eran stone boar inscription
of first year of Toramana's reign that the Huna king had conquered this region
soon after Budhagupta. On account of the lack of clear evidence it is not
possible to know the outcome of the battle fought by Bhanugupta and Goparaja
against the Hunas. Whether the Guptas could regain their control over Eran region
or not is not known. But epigraphic evidences indicate that about the same time
the Huna sovereignty in central India was challenged by Prakashdharma, the
ruler of Aulikara dynasty of Dasapura.
Prakashdharma's Risthal stone inscription of M.
year 572/C.E. 515 shows that Drumavardhana, the founder of this dynasty started
his career as senapati or general of the army of some king. How and when he
rose to the position of a king is not known. But this family had gradually built
its strength and by the time of Prakashdharma, who was the sixth ruler in line
of succession, it achieved a sovereign status and Prakashadharma became so
powerful that he challenged Huna king Toramana and inflicted a crushing defeat
on him'. As the Risthal inscription is dated in the C.E. 515, the defeat of
Toramana must have taken place before this date. After this defeat Toramana's
power suffered a decline. He appears to have been forced out of central India
about this time and retreated to Gwalior, where Toramana's son Mihirakula is
known to have ruled for fifteen years, according to the Gwalior inscription of
his reign Mihirakula conformed to the conventional image of the Hunas.
An account of Sung-Yun, a Chinese ambassador to
the Huna king of Gandhara in C.E. 52 and a somewhat later account (C.E 525-
535) given by the Alexandarian Greek, Cosmos Indicopleusts in his Christian
Topography, describe the kingdom of white Hunas proper to the west of the Indus
which separated all the countries of India from the country of the Hunas. But
these accounts describe Huna king Mihirakula (king Gallas , according to Cosmos)
as cruel and barbaric. According to Sung-Yun he was hostile to Buddhism and had
entered in a war with Kashmir (kipin). “ While cosmos mentions him as the lord
of India who oppressed people and forced them to pay tribute” .Thus, it appears
from these accounts that Mihirakula was a powerful tyrant and under his
leadership Hunas overran a large part of northern India and he exercised
suzerainty over that region. The inscription dated in the fifteenth year of his
reign shows that his sovereignty extended at least upto Gwalior. According to
the information provided by Hiuen Tsang even the contemporary Gupta king
Narsimhagupta Baladitya (who is also known from his gold coins and sealings
from Bhitari and Nalanda) was forced to the humiliating situation of paying
tribute to Mihirakula, the king of Sakala, who invaded his territory. But
finally he (Baladitya) triumphed over his enemy and resolved to kill Mihirakula,
but released him on the intercession of his mother. Mihirakula was driven out
of the plains and he obtained an asylum in Kashmir where he killed the king and
placed himself on the throne of Kashmir. From there he attacked Gandhara,
exterminated the royal family and killed the king, destroyed Buddhist
establishments, plundered the wealth of the country and returned. But within a
year he died .
According to many scholars Hiuen Tsang's account
of Mihirakula has lack of conviction. It is full of so many inaccuracies.
Besides, it is also difficult to believe many of the details of this story. The
long account of the defeat and discomfiture of Mihirakula at the hands of Gupta
king Narsimhagupta Baladitya and particularly the manner in which it was achieved
appears to have contained a great deal of exaggeration . Therefore, generally
the scholars do not place much reliance upon it.
Reference may be made in this connection to the
defeat inflicted upon the Huna king Mihrakula by the Aulikara ruler Yashodharman,
the son of Prakashadharma. We have two inscriptions of Yashodharman from
Mandasor which provide us a graphic account of the prestige, prowess and the
conquest of Yashodharman. One of them i.e. Mandasor stone slab inscription is
dated in the M.Y. 589/C.E. 532 and indirectly refers to Yashodharman's victory
over the Guptas of the east and the Hunas of the north. While his undated
Mandasor stone pillar inscription tells us, that 'he subjugated Mihirakula
whose head had never previously been brought into the humility of obeisance to
any other save the god Stahanu (Siva). Since Mandasor stone slab inscription
belongs to C.E. 532 the defeat of Mihirakula must have taken place before C.E
532. After this defeat the Hunas appear to have lost their Indian dominion.
They no longer appear as a great power or even a disturbing element in Indian
history.
Mandasor inscription describes some other
military achievements of Yashodharman and claims that he undertook a digvijaya,
the traditional Indian 'conquest of the quarters. However, this claim is not
accepted in its eternity. For Yashodharman's power was of very short duration.
He rose and fell like a meteor between C.E. 530 and 540. This finds support
from the fact that nothing is known about him beyond Mandosor inscriptions.
By this time Guptas had lost their control in
most of the parts of Aryavarta. Now how much territory was under their control,
we cannot precisely suggest, but is not unlikely to assume that it was
extending from northern Bengal at least upto eastern Uttar Pradesh, as
epigraphic evidences clearly point out that Gupta kings were still exercising
imperial authority over the region between Pundaravardhana and modern Bhitari.
Kumaragupta III, the son of Narsimhagupta, was still issuing grants in Bhitari
which is proved by the silver copper seal found from that place. No copper
plate recording the grant has been found attached to it but its very existence
proves that Kumaragupta III definitely made some donation of land either to an
individual or the temple at Bhitari. Apart from this, the continued rule of
Guptas over Magadha is evident from the clay sealings of Kumaragupta III found
from Nalanda , which indicate that he made some donation to the university of
Nalanda.
His successor Vishnugupta, the last known
imperial ruler of the Gupta dynasty whose fragmentary clay sealing has been
found at Nalanda still exercised sovereign power over Pundaravardhana in
northern Bengal as is apparent from the Domodarpur copper plate grant dated G.
year 224/C.E. 543 . This copper plate shows that Pundaravardhana was being
governed by a prince of the blood royal Maharajaputra Devabhattaraka. A
comparison of this inscription with the copper plate grant of the reign of
Budhagupta found from the same place shows that the same administrative
machinery was at work in the district, the same method and procedure was
followed in the transaction and sale of the land. Thus, there does not appear
to have been any break in the history or tradition of the imperial Gupta rule in
the east at least upto C.E. 543, except south-east portion of Bengal, whereas
stated earlier an independent kingdom had come into existence under Dharmaditya
and Gopachandra. We do not hear of any Gupta ruler after Vishnugupta and this
is a self indication that the Gupta rule ended with him. This is also supported
by a copper plate grant found at Amauna in Gaya district, in the very heart of
Magadha which was issued by Kumaramatya Maharaja Nandana in G. year 232/C.E.
551-52. It has no reference to any supreme ruler. It thus shows that by that
time i.e. C.E. 550 Guptas ceased to exercise any effective authority over the
greater part of Magadha, the land that was once their own. About this time we
find that the Maukharis and the Later Guptas who were at first feudatories of
the imperial Guptas had attained independent position. These two royal houses
shared between themselves those territories of the Gangetic plain which formed
the heart of the Gupta empire ruled over by Samudragupta and his successors.
In the west, the Maitrakas of Vallabhi who were
in control of Saurashtra and Kathiawad, realising the weak position of the
imperial Gupta power, ceased to kept even the semblance of allegiance towards
them and became independent in C.E. 550. So we find that right from the Bay of
Bengal in the east upto the Arabian sea in the west, the Gupta empire had
parcelled out in small independent kingdoms in the middle of the sixth century
C.E. However, its name lingered on in some remote parts of India, as evident by
Sumandala (Ganjam district, Orissa) copper plate grant issued by a king named
Prithivigraha. This inscription refers to the sovereignty of the Guptas by a
phrase Vasundharayam Vartamana Gupta rajye (the existing Gupta kingdom on the
earth) in the G. year 250/C.E. 569-70. It shows that some Gupta rulers were
still ruling in the second half of the sixth century C.E. and at least the
region of Kalinga was under them. The Gupta hold over Kalinga was terminated by
G. year 280/A.D. 599 is apparent from inscription of that date found at Kanasa
in the same region. In this inscription it is said that Vasundharayam
pravarttamane Gupta - kala (Gupta year current on the earth).
Thus, ended one of the greatest empires of
ancient India.
Is it good knowledge about Gupta Dynasty to write in exam ?
ReplyDeleteSuperb valuable information on Imperial Guptas History.
ReplyDelete