Indian Antiquary Vol 49

SR No.: 032541
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications
Publication Year: 1984
Total Pages: 252
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 34 MB

Page 119

JUNE, 1920]
BOOK-NOTICE
The next verse in line 1 eulogises Chandragupta II 88 one who conquered the earth as far as the ocean. Line 2 is dedicated to Kumaragupta I here described as Chandragupta's son, who protected the whole earth as a chaste and devoted wife. Line 3 praises Ghapot kachagupta who is com. pared to the moon and who is spoken of as having won by (the prowess of) his arms the good fame attained by his ancestors. Line 4 specifies in words the date of the inscription, namely, the year 116 of the era of the [Gupta] sovereigns and mentions Kumaragupta as ruling over the earth at the time. The remaining two lines record the construction of a temple sacred to a god (whose name is lost), by a band of brothers, residents of Tumbavana which is identical with modern Tumain where the inscrip
tion was found.
The chief historical interest of this inscription is this, that it enables us to recognise with certainty a member of the Imperial Gupta dynasty whose identity was hitherto a matter of surmis only. The person in question is Ghatotkachagupta. a name which was so far known from two documents (1) a seal 1 found at Basarh bearing the inscription Sri Ghatotkachaguptasya and (2) a coin 2 in the St. Petersburg collection which, according to Mr. Allan, bears on the obverse a marginal legend ending in gupta and beneath the king's arm the name Ghato with a crescent above and on the reverse a legend which seems to read Kramadityaḥ. Dr. Bloch was inclined to identify Ghatotkachagupta of the Basarh seal with Maharaja Ghatotkacha, the father and predecessor of Chandragupta I, and this view was approved of by the late Dr. V. A. Smith. 3 But Mr. Allan in his Catalogue of the Gupta Coins in the British Museum rightly points out the difficulties in the way of this identification and surmises that Ghatotkachagupta was probably a member of the Imperial Gupta family and that he probably held some office at the court of the Yuvaraja Govindagupta who was governor at
BOOK-NOTICE.
THE ANNUAL REPORT OF THE MYSORE ARCHEOLOGICAL DEPARTMENT FOR THE YEAR 1919. Bangalore, Government Press.
Mr. R. Narasimhachar, Director of Archaeological Research, Mysore, has produced a creditable and well-illustrated report of energetic departmental work during the year 1919.
115
Vaisali (Basach) during the reign of his father Chandragupta II. The Ghato of the coin in the St. Petersburg collection is believed by Mr. Allan to be still another Ghatotkachagupta on the ground that the style and weight of the coin place it about the end of the fifth century and that it therefore cannot be referred either to Ghatotkacha, father of Chandragupta I, or to Ghatotkachagupta of the Basarh seal. But this conclusion which is arrived at from such general evidence can be only approximate and not exact. It certainly requires to be modified in the light of the new information supplied by our inscription.
Hitherto the identification of Ghatotkachagupta remained uncertain because he was known only from his seal and coin which did not mention his genealogical relations and because he was, not referred to in any of the genealogical lists of the Guptas known so far. This want is now supplied by the genealogical list given in our inscription which places Ghatotkachagupta immediately after Kumaragupta I. Unfortunately the word expressing the exact relationship between Kumaragupta I and Ghatotkachagupta, which probably occurred in the inscription, is lost with the missing portion of the stone. It would appear, however, that Ghatotkachagupta was a son of Kumaragupta I and during the reign of his father held the office 5 of the governor of the province of Eran (Airikina) which included Tumbavana (the place where the inscription was recorded). This latter was evidently the reason why his name is recorded in the inscription although it refers itself to the reign of Kumaragupta I. Our inscription further gives a definite date for Ghatotkachagupta, namely, G. E. 116 (A.D. 435). This date is so convenient as to make it almost certain that the Ghatotkachagupta of the Basarh seal, of the coin of St. Petersburg collection and of our inscription were all identical.
M. B. GARDE.
The somewhat bewildering iconography of South India is again represented in the plates, and it is well that it should be so, for the more Europe students learn of this, the bette will they be able to understand Indian architectural design and ornament. They should also be specially grate. ful for the illustrations of the mastikals (memo
1 Director-General of Archeology's Annual Report for 1903-04, pp. 102 and 107.
2 Allan's Catalogue of the Coins of the Gupta Dynasties, etc. in the British Museum, p. 149 and plate XXIV, 3, and Introduction, p. liv.
3 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society for 1905, p. 153; Early History of India (edition of 1914), p. 280, note 1. Allan's Catalogue, Introduction, pp. xvi-xvii and liv.
5 That Ghatotkachagupta enjoyed a share in the Government is also proved by his having his own seal and coin.