North Indian Inscriptions

POLITICAL HISTORY

in represented on the one hand as impressing his Garuḍa signet on the Nāgas and on the other as repairing to his mother in tears just as Kṛishṇa did to Dēvakī after he had laid low his enemy. It seems that on the demise of Kumāragupta, Ghaṭōkacha occupied the Gupta throne. But hardly had he ascended the throne when the Nāgas raised the standard of revolt with such virulence and ruthlessness that the fortunes of the Gupta dynasty sunk to the lowest level. Ghaṭōtkacha was probably killed and his brother Skandagupta who had stood by him had to flee and sleep some nights on the bare earth. Soon, however, he triumphed over all difficulties and was able to re-establish the Gupta supremacy which had for a time been rudely shaken. There is, however, nothing in any of his inscriptions to show that Kumāragupta’s reign had a tragic end. All that has been mentioned in this connection in the records of Skandagupta is that the Gupta power was tottering when his father had passed away. That does not mean that Kumāragupta’s last years were troubled. It can also very well mean that the fortunes of the family ebbed away shortly after his death when Ghaṭōtkachagupta came to the throne, and were not restored till Skandagupta made himself supreme.

        The Bhitarī pillar inscription furnishes us with another item of historical importance connected with the reign of Skandagupta. Stanza 8 thereof describes the terrific conflict into which he came with the Hūṇas. Unfortunately the stanza is very much mangled and further details, if any, which it contained have been lost. With this may, however, be compared the information contained in stanza 4 of the Junāgaḍh rock inscription (No. 28 below), which says: “And, moreover, he alone has conquered, whose fame enemies proclaim (being caused to return) to the Mlēchchha countries, with (their) pride broken down to the very root.” This is a clear reference to the Hūṇas, because, so far as we know, they alone could be the Mlēchchhas who invaded the Gupta territory but were forced to return to their Mlēchchha home. This inscription contains three dates, namely, Gupta years 136, 137 and 138. It thus seems that the Hūṇas were defeated and repulsed at least before Gupta year 138=456-57 A.D. when the inscription was engraved. When there is a rebellion inside a kingdom, that affords a most suitable opportunity for outside powers to encroach upon the neighbouring territory. In many cases the insurgent chiefs themselves seek the help of foreign rulers. It is quite possible that the malcontent Nāga chieftain himself invited the Hūṇa monarch to come to his succour. The result, to begin with, was certainly disastrous, as Ghaṭōtkacha appears to have been killed and Gupta supremacy to have been tottering to its foundations. Skandagupta, however, true to his Gupta heritage, rose to the occasion, put down the Nāga rebellion and drove the Hūṇas back to their own territory. But where were the Hūṇas settled about this time? While describing the conquests of Raghu, Kālidāsa, who was a contemporary of Chandragupta II and Kumāragupta I, says that his hero marched against the northern region where his horses rested on the banks of the Vaṅkshū (Oxus), where saffron was grown and where he vanquished and killed the Hūṇa king, the inmates of whose harem had therefore to lacerate their cheeks.¹ Kshīrasavāmin, in his gloss on Amarakōśa, II.6.124, on the word Vāhlīka which means ‘saffron’, explains it by Vahlīka-dēśajaṁ | yad=Raghōr=uttara-dig-vijayē.

..................“Dudhuvur=vājinaḥ skandhām=lagna-kuṅkuma-kēsarān”

Thus according to Kshīrasvāmin, the country described in the Raghuvaṁśa, IV, 66-68, is Vāhlīkadēśa or Bactria, watered by the Vaṅkshū or Oxus. It was this province which the Hūṇas were occupying in the time of Chandragupta II and Kumāragupta I, when the Raghuvaṁśa was composed by Kālidāsa. It was from this region that the Hūṇas rushed forth and
_________________________________________________

¹ K. B. Pathak, Kālidāsa’s Mēghadūta, Intro., p. viii; also Kālidāsa and the Hūṇas of the Oxus Valley, Ind. Ant., Vol. XLI, pp. 265-67.