North Indian Inscriptions

POLITICAL HISTORY

Skandagupta and Purugupta¹ also style themselves Vikramaditya and Vikrama on their coins respectively.²

Samudragupta

       Chandragupta was succeeded by his son, Samudragupta. In the Allahabad pillar inscription there is a stanza which refers to this succession. Once when the Durbar was being held, the father seeking for real worth, called the son to him in the open assembly, and, having embraced him with his hair standing on end, addressed the words: “do protect the whole earth,” with the consequence that the other princely claimants cast jealous looks of dis appointment though the courtiers themselves breathed cheerfully. Fleet takes this verse “to indicate that Chandragupta I specially selected Samudragupta, from among several brothers, to conquer the land and to succeed him on the throne.”³ What Fleet apparently means is that Chandragupta selected Samudragupta to succeed him to the throne forthwith. The words in question are denuded of all meaning, if we suppose that Samudragupta was appointed merely as heir-apparent. It, therefore, seems that after leading a hard and strenuous life, during which he raised himself to the rank of Mahārājādhirāja, Chandragupta abdicated the throne⁴ after formally appointing Samudragupta as his successor. It thus appears that Samudragupta was not the only son of Chandragupta, or even the eldest amongst them, and that he was so chosen for his valour, tact, and other extraordinary powers.

       If Samudragupta was thus selected as immediate successor to the empire, to the exclusion of other princes of equal birth, it must have naturally created jealousy amongst them and consequently incited some of the frontier kings also to challenge his accession, at such a supremely psychological moment. This, in fact, follows from stanza 7 of the Allahabad inscription. In this verse there is a clear mention of Achyuta and Nāgasēna, and along with them has been associated in one compound word (in line 13) a third prince whose name is lost. The initial letter of his name, however, has been preserved, and is ga. In this connection it is worthy of note that the names of Nāgasēna and Achyuta have been mentioned also in line 21 of this record and in this order in the list of the Āryāvarta rulers destroyed by Samudragupta. And it is further worthy of note that contiguously with, and immediately preceding, Nāgasēna, occurs the name of Gaṇapatināga, which doubtless begins with the letter ga. The conclusion is almost irresistible that the name of the third prince mentioned along with Achyuta and Nāgasēna in verse 7 (line 13) in the same compound word, must be restored to Gaṇapati or some such word. And, as has been pointed out below, where the text of the inscription has been set forth, it can be easily and safety restored to Gaṇapa which is synonymous with Gaṇapati. We have thus three princes, namely, Achyuta, Nāgasēna and Gaṇapati mentioned together in one Sanskrit compound. And we are further told that through the prowess of his arm which was at once overflowing and impetuous, Samudragupta, singly (ēkēna) and in a moment (kshaṇāt), uprooted the three kings just mentioned. Here the words
____________________

¹ Allan, Catalogue of the Coins of the Gupta Dynasty, Intro., p. cxxii.
² It is worthy of note that in the Gupta inscriptions Ghaṭōtkacha has been called Mahārāja, but Chandragupta I, Samudragupta, Chandragupta II, etc., have been styled Mahārājādhirāja. In the Vākāṭaka plates, however, whereas the Poona plates designate Ghaṭōtkacha and Chandragupta I. Maārāja, Samudragupta and Chandragupta II, Mahārājādhirāja, the Riddapur plates call Chandragupta II alone as Mahārājādhirāja and the rest simply Mahārāja. It seems that the Vākāṭaka court writers were not great sticklers in regard to the royal formulary.
³ CII., Vol. III, 1888, p. 12, note 1.
⁴ The idea of a king entrusting the royal insignia to one of his sons and betaking himself to a forest like Vānaprastha has been repeatedly expressed by Kālidāsa in his Raghuvaṁśa (I. 8; III. 70; XIX. 1).