North Indian Inscriptions

POLITICAL HISTORY

of Surāshṭra during the reign of Chandragupta II is to be seen in rare silver coins which are more directly imitated from those of the Western Kshatrapas”¹ and are found in Kāṭhiāwāṛ only. The only date has been read on his coins is 90 or possibly 90 plus X of the Gupta era=409 or 409 plus X A.D. There is thus a gap of nearly twenty years between the only dated coin of the Western Kshatrapas (=388 or 388 plus X A.D.) and the earliest dated coin of the Guptas struck in Kāṭhiāwāṛ (=409 or 409 plus X A.D.). When then did the Gupta conquest of Surāshṭra take place, circa 388 or 409 A.D. ? It seems very unlikely that it came off about 409 A.D., that is, circa Gupta year 90, because the last date for Chandragupta is 93, and the earliest for his son and successor, Kumāragupta I is 96. Chandragupta thus appears to have ceased to be king between Gupta year 93 and 96. We have therefore to suppose that his expedition of conquest of the earth and with it his conquest of Surāshṭra came off nearly thirty years after his accession to the throne and just four years before his demise or retirement. This is a most unlikely supposition. It is far more reasonable to hold that he undertook it nearly eight years after his occupation of the Gupta throne during which period he was able to establish his power thoroughly at Pāṭaliputra. The only argument that may be urged against this inference is that there is a gap of some twenty years between the last Kshatrapa Rudrasiṁha III who was overthrown and his conqueror Chandragupta issuing their coins respectively. But this can by no means be a serious objection, because, as a matter of fact, we know that the Conqueror does not always strike coins in the territory conquered by him. To take one instance, Malwa was incorporated into the Gupta dominions not only in the time of Samudragupta and Chandragupta II but also of Kumāragupta I. And yet no coin of any one of these Gupta monarchs has yet been picked up from any part of this province. Even if no coins of Chandragupta II had been discovered in Kāṭhiāwāṛ, it would not thus have been a matter of surprise at all. How should it constitute a surprise if they are found about twenty years after the overthrow of the Kshatrapa power ? Nothing consequently precludes us from supposing that Chandragupta left the Gupta capital, Pāṭaliputra, some eight years after his coronation, on an expedition of conquest, to establish all round his position as paramount sovereign of India.

       It is a great pity that no detailed description of this expedition has come down to us, just as we have Harishēṇa’s praśasti of samudragupta. Nevertheless, we cannot get rid of the idea that some meager, though not detailed, account of Chandragupta’s dig-vijaya has been preserved for us in the shape of the Meharauli iron pillar inscription of Chandra (No. 12 below). It is true that there is a great diversity of opinion in regard to the identity of this Chandra. According to some scholars, he is the Gupta king Chandragupta I, and, according to some, Chandragupta II.² According to some, again, the inscription does not belong to the Gupta
________________________________________________________________

¹ E. J. Rapson’s Catalogue Coins Andhra Dyn., Intro., p. cli.
² James Fergusson, referring to the Persian form of the capital, expresses the opinion that the inscription is of the Chandraguptas of the Imperial Gupta dynasty (History of Indian and Eastern Architecture, Vol. II, p. 208). “My own impression at first, on independent grounds,” says J. F. Fleet, “was to allot it to Chandragupta I, the first Mahārājādhirāja of the family, of whose time we have as yet no inscriptions; and I should not be surprised to find at any time that it is proved to belong to him.” (CII., Vol. III, 1888, p. 140, note 1). He, however, admits that while the characters approximate in many respects very closely to the Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudragupta (No. 1 below), it bears the distinguishing feature of very marked mātrās, such as are noticeable in the Bilsad pillar inscription of Kumāragupta I (No. 16 below), showing that in point of time they are somewhere midway between the two Gupta monarchs. Again, the fact that the iron pillar is situated in the village of Meharauli, the name of which is a corruption of Mihirapurī (Ind. Ant., Vol. XV, p. 362), suggested to him that alternative conjecture that Chandra might be the unnamed younger brother of Mihirakula whose existence is attested by yuan Chwang. According to Hoernle the characters of the inscription belong to the Gupta variety of the north-eastern alphabet, the only other specimen of which in the west is the Udayagiri inscription of Chandragupta. He, therefore, unhesitatingly ascribes the iron pillar to this Gupta sovereign (Ind. Ant., Vol. XXI, pp. 42-44). V. A. Smith at first agreed with him (JRAS., 1897, p. 9). “Not only is there no real ground,” says Allan, “for identifying