South Indian Inscriptions

ABHIRAS

when he heard reports of the latter’s brilliant victories in North and South India. Later, Samudragupta, on some provocation, appears to have attacked the Śaka king’s territory and obtained a decisive victory over him in the battle of Èrikina. He then annexed the territory round Èrikina¹ which had strategic importance, and erected a monument there ‘for augmenting his own fame.’ He appears, however, to have allowed the Śaka king to continue in possession of the rest of his kingdom as he did in the case of some republican tribes such as the Sanakānīkas and the Kharaparikas.² It is well known that it was Samudragupta’s son Chandragupta II, who first conquered Eastern and Western Malwa in the course of his ‘conquest of the whole earth’, some time in the last decade of the 4th century A. C. The earliest dated record of the Guptas found in Malwa is the Udayagiri cave inscription of Chandragupta II, dated G. 82(401-2 A. C.)

Śrīdharavarman, though he belonged to the Śaka race, was a follower of the Hindu religion. Both he and his father Nanda bear Hindu names, He was a devout worshipper of Kārttikēya and, like an orthodox Hindu, believed that he could secure permanent residence in heaven by means of charitable works like the excavation of a well. In both the records of his reign he is described as dharmavijayin or a righteous conqueror, which implies that he did not wage any war for self-aggrandizement. His liberal policy attracted able men from distant countries like Maharashtra. He trusted them and appointed them to important military posts. His inscriptions are written in a good Sanskrit kāvya style. They show that the revival of the classical language had already commenced before the age of the Guptas. Like the Western Kshatrapas and the Ābhīras, the Śakas of central India also appear to have given liberal patronage to Sanskrit poets at their court.

We do not know how long the Śakas continued to rule in Central India. They were probably overthrown when they suffered a defeat at the hands of Chandragupta II towards the close of the 4th century A. C. Therefore, we have two copper-plate grants of Mahārāja Subandhu, both made at Māhishmatī, one of which was found somewhere in the former Barwani State and the other in one of the famous Bāgh caves.

These grants of Subandhu bear close resemblance in respect of characters, phraseology and royal sign-manual to the aforementioned grants of the Mahārājas of Khandesh. All of them probably belong to the same period. The era in which they are dated must therefore be identical. The date of the Bāgh cave plate is lost, but that of the Barwāni plate which is well preserved is the year 167. If this is referred to the Ābhīra era, it becomes equivalent to 416-17 A. C. Subandhu, therefore, flourished in the first quarter of the fifth century A. C.

Unlike the Mahārājas of Valkha, Subandhu does not refer to any suzerain even in a general manner, which shows that he was an independent ruler. In 416-17 A. C. the Gupta power had, no doubt, reached its peak. Chandragupta II was dead at the time and was succeeded by his son Kumāragupta I; but there is no reason to suppose that the Gupta dominion
____________

¹ Cf. sva-bhōga-nagar-Airikina-pradēśē in the Ēran inscription of Samudragupta. C.I.I., Vol. III p. 20. The battle of Ērikina appears to have been fought towards the close of Samudragupta’s reign. The inscription at Ēran which mentions the monument which he erected there ‘for augmenting his fame’ is probably posthumous; for it uses the past tense in describing the Gupta Emperor. Besides, the description it gives of him indicates that he had already won all his major victories. He is said to have been of irresistible valour and to have overthrown the whole tribe of kings upon the earth. His enemies were terrified by his prowess even in their dreams. Again, it describes his queen as one who went about in the company of sons and grandsons. The description plainly shows that Samudragupta was considerably advanced in age when the monument was erected, and may have died before the inscription was put up.
² That the Sanakānīkas and the Kharaparikas belonged to Central India is shown by some inscriptions. See C.I.I., Vol. III, p.25 and I.C.P.B., p.58.