North Indian Inscriptions

POLITICAL HISTORY

a guild of silk-weavers who originally belonged to the Lāṭa country but who afterwards migrated to Daśapura and settled down there. While Kumāragupta was ruling over the earth and Bandhuvarman was a prince of Daśapura, the guild, we are told, built and consecrated the Sun temple which was standing in the western ward of Daśapura, “when four centuries, increased by ninety-three, had elapsed, according to the reckoning of the Mālavas”, showing that the date was a Vikrama year and was thus equivalent to 436-37 A.D. The inscription then informs us that when a considerable time had elapsed, and also other kings had passed, “one part of the temple was shattered”, apparently through lightning, and the same Guild renovated it in the year 529. The inscription closes by telling us that there was one Vatsabhaṭṭi, who not only looked after the work of building and rebuilding the temple but also composed the draft of the record.

       The next record that we have to notice chronologically is that dated Gupta year 116 (No. 20 below) and fond at Tumain in the Guna District of the erstwhile Gwalior State, nearly forty miles west of Ēraṇ, the ancient Airikiṇa, situated in the Sagar District of Madhya Pradesh. Unfortunately, the proper right half of the inscription is gone. Nevertheless, what has been preserved of it is of great importance. It refers first to Chandragupta II in line 1, and then speaks in line 2 of his son, Kumāragupta who is there compared to Mahēndra. In line 3 mention is made of Ghaṭōtkachagupta who is represented as having inherited the inherent power of his ancestors. And the immediately next line specifies the date 116 and refers it to the reign, not of Ghaṭōtkachagupta mentioned in the preceding line, but of Kumāragupta. The conclusion is almost irresistible that Ghaṭōtkachagupta was a son of Kumāragupta, who was then in charge of the Airikiṇa District. That there was one Ghaṭōtkachagupta, not far removed from the time of Chandragupta I, is clear from his seal (No. 27 below) found at Basāṛh, the ancient Vaiśālī. We will consider this matter at greater length shortly. But here we will finish our short notice of the Tu main inscription by saying that the object of it is to record the construction of a temple, apparently of Pinākin (Śiva), at Tumbavana (Tumain) by certain brothers of a family which was settled there but which originally hailed from Vaṭōdaka, famous as a settlement of Sādhus or merchants.

       Another piece of historical information for the same reign is furnished by an inscription (No. 21 below) dated Gupta year 117 and engraved on a liṅga from Bharādhī Ḍīh near Karamḍāṁḍā, 12 miles from Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh. It registers a benefaction by Pṛithivīshēṇa, son of Chandragupta’s Mantri-Kumārāmātya Śikharasvāmin, who was the son of Vishṇupālitabhaṭṭa, son of Kumāravyabhaṭṭa, of the Chhandōgas and of the Aśva-Vājin gōtra. Pṛithivīshēṇa has been described, like his father, as Mantri-Kumārāmātya, not, however, of Chandragupta II, but of Kumāragupta I. But at the time when the benefaction was made, he was Mahābalādhikṛita. The benefaction was made for the worship of Mahādēva, known as Pṛithivīśvara, apparently, the liṅga of our inscription founded by and named after Pṛithivīshēṇa. The portion of the inscription, which recorded the object thereof, is not well preserved, but what remains shows that the donees were some Brāhmaṇas from Ayōdhyā, connected with Mahādēva Śailēśvara, who appears to be the principal deity of the religious settlement. The Brāhmaṇas belonged to different gōtras and charaṇas and were proficient in their penances, Vadic recitation, mantras, sūtras, bhāshyas and so forth. The benefaction was made to enable them to perform some duties in connection with the dēvadrōṇī at Bhāraḍī, which apparently is the same as Bharādhī Ḍīh, the place where the liṅga was found. And it seems that the money grant contributed by Pṛithivīshēṇa by way of endowment was deposited in the treasury houses of the principal divinity Śailēśvara.

       So far in regard to the Brahmanic inscriptions of the time of Kumāragupta. But there are at least five inscriptions of his time which are of a non-Brahmanic character. Of these, two are