North Indian Inscriptions

POLITICAL HISTORY

State. Nevertheless, it is worthy of note that they are connected with Brahmanism; because, the land in each case was bought for settling down Brāhmaṇas in the extreme north of Bengal and enabling them to perform either the Agnihōtra or pañcha-mahāyajña rites.¹ There are many other Brahmanic records of the time of Kumāragupta which throw light on the developments of his reign. The earliest of these (No. 16 below) is engraved on a pillar found at Bilsaḍ in Etah District in Uttar Pradesh and is dated “in the ninety-sixth year of the increasingly victorious (Gupta) rule (abhivarddhamāna-vijaya-rājya-saṁvatsara) pertaining to the prosperous Kumāragupta (I), the Mahārājādhirāja.” It records that one Dhruvaśarman constructed a pratōlī or gateway, established a sattra or almshouse and erected the column in question, in connection with a temple of the god Svāmi-Mahāsēna. Then there are two partly broken stone inscriptions (Nos. 17 and 26 below) found at Gaḍhwā in the Allahabad District which also refer themselves to the reign of Kumāragupta I. Both of them were originally dated, but the year in one of them is not preserved, whereas that in the other is Gupta year 98. This last records the gift of twelve dīnāras for the maintenances of a sattra or almshouse, apparently, to a Brāhmaṇa belonging to the community of Sadāsattra. The other inscription, the year of which has been effaced, seems to record two gifts, one of ten dīnāras for the maintenance of a sattra and apparently to a Brāhmaṇa of the same community. There are two more Gaḍhwā inscriptions² which also speak of endowments made to other sattras. And as this place was thus studded with many such almshouses, it naturally came to be known as Sadāsattra or Perpetual Alms-house, and the Brāhmaṇas thereof as Sadāsattrasāmānya, that is, as ‘pertaining to the Community of Sadāsattra’.

       There are two more Brahmanic inscriptions of the time of Kumāragupta of which we have to take cognisance. They were found in the western part of Mālwā. They are of particular interest inasmuch as they belong to a family of this feudatory chieftains that ruled over that part of Central India. The first of these³ was found at Gaṅgdhār in the erstwhile Jhalawar State, Rajputana, and is of the time of a prince called Viśvavarman, who was either a son or younger brother of Naravarman whose inscription dated Vikram 461 and 474 we have noted in our account of Chandragupta II’s reign, and, who, it is all but certain, was a feudatory of that Gupta monarch. The date of the Gangdhār record is not happily worded, but, it seems, it is dated in the Kṛita year 488 (expired). As the year has been called Kṛita, it has to be taken as a Vikrama year. It is thus equivalent to 431-32 A.D. expired and must be taken to belong to the reign of Kumāragupta, though his name has not been specified. The inscription then records the fact that a personage called Mayūrāksha, who apparently pertained to the bania caste and was an able minister of Kumāragupta I, executed many charitable works at Gargaraṭapura, doubtless Gaṅgdhār also called Gaṅgrāḍ. He had two sons, Vishṇubhaṭa and Haribhaṭa, who were engaged in business and who, at the instance of their father, constructed a temple of Vishṇu, whereas Mayūrāksha himself built an edifice of the Divine Mothers, full of female ghouls (ḍākinī), and also a large drinking step-well. The next inscription (No. 35 below) which we have to notice was originally found at Mandasōr, though it is now deposited in the State Museum, Gwalior. Fortunately for us, it refers itself to the reign of Kumāragupta I, and also speaks of his feudatory Bandhuvarman, as protecting Daśapura. Bandhuvarman is describbed as a son of Viśvavarman, no doubt, the son or younger brother of Naravarman as we learn from the Gaṅgdhār record. Bandhuvarman doubtless pertained to the family of feudatories ruling in Daśapura. The record bears two dates, one the year 493 and the other the year 529. The first of these years is the date of the consecration of a temple of the Sun constructed by
_______________________________________________

¹ ABORI., Vol. XII, p. 113.
² No. 8 below and CII., Vol. III, 1888, No. 64, pp. 264 ff.
³ CII., Vol. III, 1888, No. 17, pp. 72 ff.