...THE Vākāṭaka chronology is still more or less conjectural, but there are a few fixed
points. Though Dr. Jayaswal’s view that the Kalachuri-Chēdi era was originally
founded by the Vākāṭaka king Vindhyaśakti I1 is untenable as none of the records
of the Vākāṭakas themselves are dated in it, it is not unlikely that Vindhyaśakti I rose to
power about the same time as the Ābhīra king Īśvarasēna i.e. in circa 250 A.C. He may
have ruled for about twenty years (c. 250 to 270 A.C.)2 His son Pravarasēna I is credited
in the Purāṇas with a reign of sixty years.3 This is not unlikely in view of his performance
of four Aśvamēdhas and several Vājapēya and other Śrauta sacrifices. He may therefore
have flourished from c. 270 to 330 A.C. Pravarasēna I’s long reign is also indicated by
the fact that he was succeeded in the elder branch not by a son, but by a grandson,
viz., Rudrasēna I. This latter prince may have ruled for about twenty years (c. 330 to 350
A.C.). When his son Pṛithvīshēṇa I succeeded him, his family had been ruling over the
kingdom for a hundred years (250 to 350 A.C.) and this is in keeping with the description
in the Vākāṭaka grants that his treasure and army had been accumulating for a hundred
years4 . Pṛithivīshēṇa I seems to have had a long reign ; for he is said to have lived to see a
succession of sons and grandsons. Besides, his son Rudrasēna II was a junior contemporary
of the Gupta king Chandragupta II-Vikramāditya (c. 380-413 A.C.), whose daughter
Prabhāvatīguptā was married to him. Vincent Smith’s conjecture that this matrimonial
alliance of the Guptas and the Vākāṭakas occurred at the time of Chandragupta II’s
invasion of the territory of the Śaka Satraps of Gujarāt and Saurāshṭra ‘somewhere about
395 A.C.5’ appears quite plausible. Rudrasēna II therefore may have come to the throne
in c. 400 A.C. He had a short reign of about 5 years (c. 400 to 405 A.C.) ; for his dowager
queen Prabhāvatīguptā was acting as a regent for her son Yuvarāja Divākarasēna for at
least 13 years. Divākarasēna seems to have died soon after the issue of the Poonā plates
of his mother Prabhāvatīguptā ; for, no other grant of his reign has come down to us. He
may therefore be referred to the period c. 405 to 420 A.C. He was succeeded by his younger
brother Dāmōdarasēna alias Pravarasēna II, who had a long reign of about thirty years6 (c. 420 to 450 A.C.). His son Narēndrasēna II, who had a long reign of about thirty years6 ruled for about twenty years, the former from c. 450 to 470 A.C., and the latter from c. 470
to 490 A.C. The period thus conjecturally assigned to Pṛithivīshēṇa II’s reign is corroborated by the date of his feudatory, the Uchchakalpa prince Vyāghra,7 whose stone inscriptions
have been found at Nachnā and Ganj in Madhya Pradesh. The latter’s son Jayanātha
was ruling in the Gupta years 174 and 1778 . His reign may have extended from G. 170
1 History of India, etc., pp. 109 f.
2 I adopt the reading समा: षण्णवतिं भूत्वा पृथिवों तु समेष्यति given by a Ms. of the Vāyupurāṇa. D.K.A.,
p. 48, f. n. 86.
3 Cf. विन्ध्यशक्तिसुतश्चापि प्रवीरो नाम वीर्यवान् । भोक्ष्यते च समा: षष्टिं पुरिकां: चनकां न्च वै ॥ ॥ Ibid, p. 50.
4 Cf. वर्षशतमभिवर्द्धमानकोशदण्डसाधनसन्तानपुत्रपोत्रिण : in No. 3, line 11.
5 J.R.A.S., (1914), pp. 317 ff.
6 His Pāṇdhurṇā plates (No. 14) are dated in the twenty-ninth regnal year.
7 Vyāghra was not a feudatory of Pṛithivīshēna I as supposed by some scholars.. See below, pp. 89f.
8 For a detailed discussion of the identification of the era in which the dates of the Uchchakalpa
kings are recorded, see my article entitled ‘The Dates of Uchchakalpa Kings’ in Ep. Ind., Vol. XXIII,
pp. 171 f.